Home » Entertainment » GloRilla Defends “Never Find” Against Copyright Lawsuit

GloRilla Defends “Never Find” Against Copyright Lawsuit

by Julia Evans – Entertainment Editor

GloRilla Seeks Dismissal of Copyright Lawsuit Over “No BBL” ‌Lyric

Rapper GloRilla, along with UMG ‍Recordings, Warner Chappell Music, and BMG Rights ‍Management, is ⁢requesting a federal court in Louisiana dismiss a copyright infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed by Natalie Henderson (also known as Slimdabodylast), alleges GloRilla’s song “Never ⁤Find” unlawfully used a phrase popularized by Henderson’s earlier track, “All Natural.”

Henderson claims her song, released in early 2024, gained online attention for its‍ celebration of ​natural ​bodies and featured the lyrics “all naturale, ⁤no BBL.” She asserts GloRilla’s lyric – “Natural, no BBL, but I’m ‍still gon’ give them hell” – is substantially similar and ​has resulted in financial ​gain for GloRilla and her collaborators.

GloRilla’s defense centers on several arguments. First,they contend henderson ​cannot demonstrate that⁢ glorilla​ had access to “All Natural.” The legal team argues simply posting a song online doesn’t meet the required legal standard for proving access,which typically necessitates evidence of widespread distribution or commercial success​ – factors‌ they claim are absent in Henderson’s case.

Furthermore,⁢ the defense disputes the claim of substantial similarity. They highlight that⁢ Henderson’s‍ phrase functions as a repeating hook, while⁢ GloRilla’s line appears only once within a⁢ different lyrical context and utilizes a‌ distinct rhyme scheme. The lawyers also point to the common usage of phrases like “give them hell” in music, arguing they don’t constitute copyrightable copying.

GloRilla’s team⁤ also challenges Henderson’s claims for damages, questioning her ability to pursue both statutory​ and actual damages‌ without proving sufficient infringement to warrant an injunction. They further argue that phrases celebrating natural bodies ⁤are prevalent in recent music and lack the necessary ‌originality for ‌copyright protection.

The⁣ motion to dismiss asserts that viral phrases, irrespective of their popularity, cannot automatically be considered intellectual property, and ‍requests the court to dismiss the case entirely.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.