Striking a Chord: The Copyright Clash Behind “Thinking Out Loud”

Noah James

In 2023, Ed Sheeran faced a high-stakes copyright battle with the estate of Ed Townsend, co-writer of Marvin Gaye’s 1973 classic “Let’s Get It On.” The claim? Sheeran’s smash hit “Thinking Out Loud” borrowed the same four-chord progression and syncopated groove. What followed was a courtroom drama - complete with live guitar demos, expert testimony, and a landmark verdict that clarified how copyright protects creativity without locking down music’s basic building blocks.

Background

The Townsend estate sued in Manhattan federal court, alleging that Sheeran’s song lifted the harmonic structure of “Let’s Get It On.” Although the melodies, lyrics, and arrangements differed, the plaintiffs argued that the four-chord sequence was the “heart” of both songs and could not be coincidentally identical.

Sheeran and co-writer Amy Wadge countered that the contested chord progression is one of the most common in popular music. On the stand, Sheeran performed the progression in “Thinking Out Loud” and then played it in dozens of other hits—from The Beatles to Taylor Swift—to show that no single songwriter owns these harmonic building blocks.

After a week of testimony, the jury found no copyright infringement. The Second round within the Court of Appeals upheld that decision, and in 2025 the Supreme Court declined to review the case.

Legal Framework: Original Expression vs. Substantial Similarity

Two key legal doctrines drove this case:

• Original Expression: U.S. copyright law protects an author’s original creative choices—melodies, lyrics, and arrangements—not generic elements like chord progressions or scale patterns.

• Substantial Similarity: To prove infringement, a plaintiff must show that an ordinary observer would recognize ones work as having appropriated protected expression from another. Here, the court agreed the shared progression was too “ubiquitous” to meet that test.

  
  

The Townsend estate also needed to establish Sheeran’s access to “Let’s Get It On” and that any similarity was more than mere coincidence. By tracing the progression through countless songs, Sheeran’s defense undercut the notion that he directly copied Gaye’s work.

Courtroom Drama: Guitars, Experts, and Live Demos

Few trials feature live performances, but this one did. Sheeran’s on-stage guitar demonstration transformed abstract music theory into an enlightening experience for jurors. He showed how the same chord sequence underpinned hits across genres—arguing that if every songwriter who used it faced litigation, the act of songwriting itself would be paralyzed.

Musicians from both sides offered dueling analyses: the plaintiffs focused on the “feel” or “vibe” of the grooves, while defense experts emphasized the technical differences in melody, rhythm, and production. Ultimately, the jury sided with Sheeran’s argument that similarities in basic harmony didn’t amount to actionable copying.

The Shadow of “Blurred Lines”

No discussion of Gaye’s catalog is complete without the 2015 Blurred Lines ruling, where Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams were found liable for copying the “feel” of Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up.” That decision sent shockwaves through the music industry, suggesting that intangible elements—style, rhythm, groove—could be protected.

The Sheeran victory marked a recalibration. By reaffirming that copyright safeguards expression rather than impression, the court drew a clearer line between inspiration and infringement—restoring confidence that creative influence remains free for all.

Impact and Looking Ahead

The Sheeran case sends several clear messages:

• Songwriters’ Toolkit: Basic chord progressions and rhythms remain in the public domain, ensuring the freedom to create derivative works.

• Hearing Outlook: Future infringement claims will likely demand evidence of copying distinctive melodic hooks or lyrical passages—not vague similarity in style. 

• AI and Originality: As artificial intelligence generates new compositions, courts will grapple with whether machine-created music meets the originality requirement for copyright protection.

  
  

For pre-law students and emerging artists alike, the ruling underscores the balance copyright law must strike—protecting creative expression without stifling the shared language of art.

Conclusion

The Ed Sheeran vs. Marvin Gaye trial wasn’t just a clash of two songs—it was a moment to reaffirm how copyright should foster innovation without overreaching. By emphasizing originality and substantial similarity, the court preserved music’s fundamental building blocks for future creators. For anyone interested in the intersection of art and law, this case offers a vivid lesson in how legal frameworks shape the very fabric of creativity.

Legal Terms to Know

• Copyright Infringement: Unauthorized use of protected ex

  pression in a way that violates the copyright holder’s exclusive rights.

• Original Expression: The specific, creative elements of a work that are eligible for copyright protection. 

• Substantial Similarity: A test to determine whether an average person would perceive ones work as appropriating protected aspects of another. 

• Derivative Work: A new creation that is based on or derived from one or more existing works.

Works Cited

Katersky, Amy, and Maria Deliso. “Ed Sheeran wins copyright infringement lawsuit involving ‘Thinking Out Loud’.” ABC News, May 4, 2023. https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/jury-reaches-verdict-ed-sheeran-copyright-infringement-case/story?id=99022695

Mier, Tom. “Ed Sheeran Wins ‘Let’s Get It On’ Copyright Case in Appeals Court.” Rolling Stone, Nov. 1, 2024. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/ed-sheeran-wins-marvin-gaye-copyright-lawsuit-appeals-1235150674/

Ntim, Zach. “Supreme Court Rejects Bid To Reopen Ed Sheeran Copyright Suit.” Deadline, June 17, 2025. https://deadline.com/2025/06/ed-sheeransupreme-court-thinking-out-loud-marvin-gaye-1236435411/

Steenwyk, Emily Lou. “Copyright Law in the Spotlight: The Williams v. Gaye ‘Blurred Lines’ Case.” Forensis Group, June 25, 2025. https://www.forensisgroup.com/resources/expert-legal-witness-blog/copyright-law-in-the-spotlight-the-williams-v-gaye-blurred-lines-case