Nicki Minaj settles with Tracy Chapman for $450,000 in copyright infringement case

By Emmanuel Legrand

US singer/songwriter Tracy Chapman has accepted the $450,000 settlement proposal offered by rapper Nicki Minaj for the use of Chapman's song 'Baby Can I Hold You' from 1988 by Minaj in the song 'Sorry', created in 2018 but never officially released. Minaj's lawyers made the offer on 17 Dec. 2020, and Chapman agreed to the terms on 30 Dec., according to documents filed with a Federal Court in California.

  Chapman was objecting to the use of her song by Minaj, arguing that she initially declined Minaj license to use its but Minaj still went on with the recording. The song found its way on the radio show of Funkmaster Flex on New York radio station Hot 97, with Minaj stating that she was not responsible for the leak.

  In filings with the District Court, Minaj, real name Onika Tanya Maraj, argued that "the creation of the song constitutes fair use." Chapman said instead that the use of the song constituted willful infringement. 

A dispute of material facts

  According to court documents, Chapman alleged that Minaj was liable for copyright infringement in two ways: (1) for creating a song that incorporated lyrics and melodies of 'Baby Can I Hold You'; and (2) for distributing the song to a DJ and radio host. Chapman also requested that the Court summarily adjudicated that the infringement was willful.

  In a September ruling, Judge Virginia A. Phillips granted summary judgment to Minaj. She wrote: "As a genuine dispute of material fact exists as to the distribution of the song, Chapman is not entitled to summary judgment on that portion of the infringement claim. For the reasons discussed above, however, this Court finds that any liability for Maraj's creation of the song is barred by the fair use doctrine. The Court therefore DENIES Chapman's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and GRANTS Maraj's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment."

  In her defense of fair use, the judge wrote that "uprooting these common practices would limit creativity and stifle innovation within the music industry." However, the judge also ruled that since Minaj was offering contradictory explanations as to how the song ended up in the hands of Funkmaster Flex, the matter should be resolved in court. 

Affirming artists' rights

  A trial was scheduled for March 2, 2021. “We settled for one reason only. It would have cost us more to go to trial,” a lawyer for Minaj, Peter W. Ross, told The New York Times.

  Chapman said in the statement that the settlement “affirms that artists’ rights are protected by law and should be respected by other artists.” She added: “As a songwriter and an independent publisher I have been known to be protective of my work. I have never authorised the use of my songs for samples or requested a sample. This lawsuit was a last resort.”

  For Charley Londoño, a Los Angeles-based copyright lawyer, the defense of “fair use” under US Copyright law is "so fact driven and such a slippery slope with the four-factor analysis, outcomes for such defense are never guaranteed." 

Correct decision to settle

  Commenting on the case, Londoño elaborated: "Regarding Chapman v. Minaj, I agree with Judge Phillips regarding Minaj availing herself of 'fair use' and not uprooting musical artists’ ability to create music in private without limiting creativity and stifling innovation."

  He added: "However, with regards to Chapman’s allegations that Minaj had leaked it to Funkmaster Flex so he could air it on his radio show, and that such airplay infringed on Chapman’s 'bundle of rights' (e.g., right of distribution, reproduction and public performance), and Minaj saying she did not leak it to Funkmaster Flex, and Funkmaster Flex saying that he had gotten it from a blogger; I feel it would have cost a lot more than $450,000 to litigate the veracity of Minaj’s and Funkmaster Flex’s statements."

  He concluded: "Ultimately, I believe that Minaj’s attorney advised her correctly to settle."