There’s a fascinating case developing in the US (complaint here courtesy of Simon Geiregat), which could have a lasting effect in the reggaetón music genre.In 1989, Cleveland “Clevie” Browne and Wycliffe “Steely” Johnson released “Fish Market,” which introduced an iconic drum beat that would affect a generation. The rhythm (or riddim) was used in a more popular song, also written by them, called “Dem Bow“, which spawned the “dembow” music genre. Dembow ws adopted by the Dominican Republic music scene, specially the “Bajo Mundo” genre, and it would become the foundation of what is now known as reggaeton, influencing Latin American pop music in the following decades.
Over 30 years later, Steely & Clevie Productions is suing prominent reggaeton artists like Bad Bunny, El Chombo, Luis Fonsi, and Daddy Yankee for unauthorised use of this rhythm. The lawsuit, involving thousands of songs including hits like “Despacito,” could have significant repercussions in pop music, challenging norms in rhythm usage and copyright. The case highlights issues of cultural appropriation and economic disparity in music. Is copying a music beat copyright infringement or cultural appropriation? Did Steely and Clevie really come up with the dembow rhythm, or was this just the first time a popular Jamaican street beat had been recorded in a fixed medium?
There appears to be no question that reggaeton has strong influence from Fish Market. Steely & Clevie Productions claims that the success of Shabba Ranks’s “Dem Bow”, which included lawful use of the Fish Market rhythm, crediting Steely & Clevie as co-writers, inspired other artists to copy the rhythm. Browne and Johnson claim that the artists named in the lawsuit would have had access to “Fish Market” because of its wide availability, and that they also would have had access to Bobo General and Sleepy Wonder’s “Pounder“, another song from 1990 whose rhythm Browne and Johnson say is “substantially similar, if not virtually identical” to that of “Fish Market”. You can hear some of the rythm in hits such as Daddy Yankee’s “Gasolina“, and Bad Bunny’s “Tití me preguntó“.
One of the issues in the lawsuit is whether the dembow rhythm is protectable under copyright law in the US. Another issue is whether the plaintiffs have waited too long to file the lawsuit, why wait for the field of reggaeton to develop without taking action?
The lawsuit is massive, it involves 1,800 songs from more than 160 defendants. Needless to say, musicians have gotten together to have the case dismissed, based mostly on the question of whether a basic drum beat is copyrightable. The motion to dismiss was discussed in a hearing in front of District Judge André Birotte Jr., who used to be a DJ (as a former DJ myself, I empathise).
In the hearing, the judge expressed concern that the lawsuit could stifle creativity in the reggaeton genre. The defendants argued that the drum rhythm in “Fish Market” is not protectable under copyright law. They also argue that the plaintiffs waited too long to file the lawsuit, and that they have not adequately proven that their work is original.The judge commented during the hearing:
“How would you distinguish this, if at all, from the traditional dancehall rhythms used since I was a kid in reggae? If you go on the streets of Jamaica… big speakers, same beat,” Judge Birotte asked. “Again, I was a college party music DJ. I had probably hundreds — hopefully this is beyond the statute of limitations — hundreds of CDs from the streets of New York and New Jersey with literally the same riddim running for 45 minutes.”
The lawsuit has sparked a debate about the scope of copyright protection for musical rhythms. Some experts argue that the rhythm in “Fish Market” is sufficiently original to be protected under copyright law, while others argue that it is simply a common element of reggaeton music that cannot be protected.
It will come as no surprise that I tend to side with the reggaeton artists here for various reasons. Experts have claimed that the drums in “Fish Market” were not novel, and while novelty is not a copyright test, it is relevant if they’re trying to protect something as basic as a beat, which is the building block of music. It’s possible that the beat is not their creative creation, but just a recording of already popular rhythms. I’m also bothered that they’re trying to protect the rhythm itself, it has become clear that while some of the early Jamaican dembow hits used samples from “Fish Market”, most of the reggaeton versions come from different traditions from Dominican Republic, where it spread to Puerto Rico and New York. It seems like none of the reggeaton songs use samples, they’re just using the same beat.
I also think that the protection of basic musical elements is extremely problematic, this is close to protecting an idea and not the expression of the idea, and it is as close to creating a copyright monopoly as I’ve ever seen before, that’s not what copyright is for.
Finally, I’m not the biggest fan of modern reggaeton, it all sounds the same to me, but if this lawsuit affects “Ven Bailalo” by Angel & Khris, this will become personal.
0 Comments