You Stole My Song! Beyoncé Sued For $7 Million By Background Singer For Stealing ‘XO’ - Read The Documents

Beyonce Knowles Sued $7 Million Lawsuit

Jun. 13 2015, Updated 10:58 a.m. ET

Link to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Email

Beyoncé Knowles is laughing off the 7 million dollar lawsuit filed by a background singer accusing her of stealing his music for her hit song "XO" the explosive court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com reveal.

Queen Bey explained to the court the two tracks don't even sound a little bit alike, and she mentioned that she has no need to steal since she has “17 Grammy awards and 118 million records sold.”

Article continues below advertisement

READ THE COURT DOCUMENTS

A background singer named Ahmad Lane filed the federal lawsuit last year against Knowles, her music company Parkwood Entertainment and Columbia Records, accusing Jay Z’s wife of stealing his music for her hit song "XO." He claimed that he worked as a background singer with Knowles’ current background singer Chrissy Collins for another artist. During his time working with Collins he had given her a copy of his song “XOXO” to listen to and infers that she passed it along to Knowles.

On June 4, 2015, Knowles fired back at the background singer’s lawsuit claiming his complaint is a “vague and cryptic.” She explains that she is a internationally known singer who has won 17 Grammys and sold over 118 million albums

“The two works at issue are entirely different songs that share no lyrical or musical similarity, other than perhaps the letters “X” and “O.” The documents also state that Lane never filed a “copyright registration” for his song.

Article continues below advertisement

The documents claims that Lane’s description of the copyright infringement is due to the fact that Knowles’ song “allegedly copies the first four bars of an eight bar melody that is looped,” and “contains a four note sequence that is similar to the four note sequence,” in her song.

Knowles’ attorney writes asking the court to listen to the man's song and compare it to hers and states that if anyone was to listen to both they would find the two works don't share any, "melodic content and there is no meaningful similarity in pitch series, rhythm or rhythmic patterns, melodic development or structure"

Also, Knowles’ attorney states, "the two songs are distinct from a thematic perspective" with the man's song describing the narrator's romantic and sexual feelings towards a new lover. His song features lyrics talking about “being horny” and “wanting to love every inch of the lover's body,” while her song is a "celebration of love and life, emphasizing the importance of living in the present with a loved one ‘before our time has run out.’”

Knowles is asking the court to dismiss the $7 million dollar lawsuit and that the background singer be awarded nothing.

Advertisement

© Copyright 2021 Radar Media Group LLC. Radar and RadarOnline are registered trademarks. All Rights Reserved. People may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.