Brainard v. Vassar

Memorandum; Granting Motion for Summary Judgment


The Sixth Circuit grants Defendant Phil Vassar, et al's Motion For Summary Judgment in a claim for copyright infringement of a musical composition.

The court found the elements of infringement were not present. The memorandum also provides a nice glimpse inside the Nashville music business and how songs are "pitched" to recording artists.

To survive summary judgment, the court stated, the plaintiffs would have to sufficiently show that Vassar had “access” to their song and that Defendants’ song is “substantially similar” to Plaintiffs’ song.


The defendants submitted evidence of their “pitch” log to show they had pitched the song to an A&R employee of Vassar’s record label and that a copy of the song on CD had been left for Vassar’s manager. The defendants assert the A&R record label employee agreed she would get the song to Vassar. The A&R record label employee had no recollection of ever hearing the song and stated she could not pitch directly to artists on the label’s roster.

The court stated:

Again, the plaintiffs’ burden is not to show that Vassar absolutely heard the song or even that he absolutely had the opportunity to hear the song; rather, the plaintiffs’ burden, at this stage, is to show, with all factual inferences drawn in their favor, that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Vassar had a “reasonable opportunity” to hear the song. Blige, 558 F.3d at 491. The plaintiffs have met this relatively low burden by showing that the plaintiffs’ song was in the possession of Vassar’s manager’s office and Vassar’s record label, and by showing that there was some indication that the record label was prepared to forward the song to Vassar. This evidence creates at least a fact issue as to access.


The court moved to the next step, but found no “substantial similarity” between the two songs.

On the technical musical structure, there appears to be general agreement that the two songs are not particularly

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Reference Info:Decision | Federal, 6th Circuit, Tennessee | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Tamera Bennett, Bennett Law Office, PC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Bennett Law Office, PC on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.