The Seventh Circuit’s recent ruling in Eddie Richardson v Karim Kharbouch clarifies a key distinction between sound recording copyright and musical composition copyright when assessing infringement.
The plaintiff, known as Hotwire the Producer, created an instrumental hip hop beat titled "Hood Pushin Weight" and uploaded it online. After hearing the hit "Ain't Worried About Nothin" by French Montana, he believed his beat was indistinguishable from the song. He registered his beat as a sound recording with the U.S. Copyright Office, but did not register it as a musical composition. The court held that to prevail, Richardson needed to show duplication or sampling, not mere imitation, and found no evidence of such infringement, granting summary judgment in favor of French Montana. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision.
The sound recording copyright protects only the actual sounds fixed in a recording—the digital audio of the beat.
In contrast, musical composition copyright covers the underlying musical work (melody, harmony, rhythm, and accompanying lyrics) that may be separately infringed even if the actual sound recording is not copied. The case underscores that registering only a sound recording (and not the musical composition) can limit remedies to those tied to the recorded sounds, not to the broader musical work.
Facts and quotes from the ruling reflect the technical difference between the two forms of protection and the necessity of proper registration corresponding to the infringed element. The decision illustrates that without evidence of duplication or sampling of the protected musical composition (if claimed), a plaintiff may not recover under a sound-recording-based claim alone.
The court determined that he was required to show duplication or sampling, not mere imitation.
Summary judgments in such matters hinge on the specific type of copyright at issue and the proof of infringement aligned with that copyright category. This distinction remains central for creators and rights holders navigating infringement claims and registration strategies.
Author summary: The ruling clarifies that sound recordings and musical compositions are protected separately; mere imitation of a beat without duplicating or sampling the underlying musical work may not suffice for infringement under a sound-recording claim.