Skip to content 
British singer-songwriter Olivia Dean has become connected to the latest high-profile music copyright dispute, after the publisher behind the late Bill Withers’ catalogue commenced proceedings alleging that Dean’s song “I’ve Seen It” infringes copyright in the classic “Just the Two of Us.”
The proceedings, filed on 1 October 2026 in the United States, provide another example of the increasingly important—and sometimes difficult—question of where musical inspiration ends and copyright infringement begins.
What is the claim?
The dispute concerns Dean’s song “I’ve Seen It,” which appears on her 2025 album The Art of Loving.
Mattie Music Group, which manages rights in Bill Withers’ catalogue, alleges that the song reproduces protectable elements of “Just the Two of Us,” the famous composition associated with Withers and Grover Washington Jr.
According to reports of the complaint, the publisher instructed a musicologist to analyse the two compositions. The resulting analysis is said to have identified substantial similarities in protectable musical expression, particularly in relation to the melody. The claimant alleges that the combination of shared musical features is sufficiently significant to support an inference of copying rather than coincidence or the use of commonplace musical elements.
Olivia Dean is not personally being sued
One particularly interesting aspect of the proceedings is that Dean herself is reportedly not named as a defendant, nor are her co-writers Bastian Langebæk and Max Wolfgang.
Instead, the proceedings target businesses involved in the commercial exploitation and publishing of the recording, including Capitol Records, Universal Music Group and publishing interests associated with the song.
The importance of “Just the Two of Us”
“Just the Two of Us” became a major hit in the early 1980s and remains one of the most recognisable songs associated with Bill Withers.
That continuing popularity could become relevant to the question of access.
In a copyright infringement claim based upon copying, a claimant will ordinarily need to establish more than the fact that two compositions sound similar. There must be a basis for concluding that protected material was actually copied.
According to reports of the proceedings, the claimant relies upon the enormous and sustained popularity of “Just the Two of Us”—including decades of radio play—to argue that Dean and her collaborators had a reasonable opportunity to encounter the earlier composition.
When does musical similarity become copyright infringement?
This is the difficult question at the heart of many music copyright cases.
Copyright does not provide an artist with a monopoly over an entire musical style, genre or general “feel.” Music inevitably involves recurring building blocks such as chords, rhythms, scales and commonly used progressions.
The legal question therefore tends to focus on whether the later work has reproduced protectable original expression, rather than merely using musical ideas or features which are commonplace.
That is why expert musicological evidence can become so important.
Experts may examine matters including:
- melody;
- rhythm;
- pitch;
- harmonic structure;
- phrasing;
- sequence and arrangement of notes; and
- the combination and repetition of particular musical elements.
The fact that individual musical components may be commonplace does not necessarily end the enquiry. A particular selection or arrangement of those components can potentially amount to protectable expression.
The allegation of substantial similarity
The publisher’s case appears to focus particularly heavily upon melody.
The complaint reportedly alleges that the two compositions contain substantial similarities in protectable musical expression and that there has been repeated copying of what the claimant regards as a distinctive protected melody.
This could become the central battleground if the proceedings progress.
The defendants may seek to dispute the similarities identified by the claimant, argue that the relevant features are not sufficiently original to attract protection, or contend that any similarities result from conventional musical techniques rather than copying.
An increasingly familiar dispute in the music industry
The proceedings form part of a much wider debate within the music industry.
High-profile copyright disputes have increasingly required courts to consider how far copyright protection should extend to relatively short melodies, chord sequences and other musical components.
For songwriters, there is an obvious tension.
Copyright needs to provide meaningful protection against copying. At the same time, music is inherently cumulative: artists routinely work with established musical conventions and are influenced, consciously or otherwise, by the enormous catalogue of music that preceded them.
If copyright protection is interpreted too narrowly, genuinely original compositions may be vulnerable to imitation. If interpreted too broadly, artists may face claims simply because their work happens to share relatively ordinary musical characteristics with an earlier song.
Could subconscious copying be relevant?
Another important feature of music copyright law is that copying does not necessarily have to be deliberate.
A songwriter could theoretically encounter a piece of music, subsequently forget about it, and later reproduce elements of it without consciously recognising where those elements originated.
This concept of subconscious copying has featured in previous music copyright litigation and demonstrates why evidence of access to an earlier work can become significant.
With a song as well known as “Just the Two of Us,” the claimant may argue that access can readily be inferred. But access alone does not establish infringement: the claimant must still establish legally relevant copying of protected expression.
Why this case matters
The Olivia Dean dispute highlights the copyright risks facing modern musicians, producers, publishers and record companies.
Before commercially releasing music, particularly where a melody resembles an existing composition, rights holders may need to consider whether clearance or specialist advice is required.
The case also demonstrates why copyright disputes can become particularly complex where relatively short sections of music are involved. Two songs sounding similar is not, by itself, the legal test.
Courts must separate ideas, musical conventions and commonplace elements, which generally cannot be monopolised, from the original expression that copyright law protects.
The ultimate question in the Olivia Dean dispute will therefore not simply be: Do these songs sound alike?
It will be whether protectable elements of “Just the Two of Us” were copied in “I’ve Seen It” to an extent sufficient to constitute copyright infringement.
For now, that remains an allegation rather than an established fact. With the proceedings having only just been commenced, the response from the defendants—and any detailed musicological evidence produced by both sides—will be particularly important in determining how the dispute develops.
Protecting music and creative works
Copyright can protect songs, recordings, artwork, written works and a wide range of other creative material. However, establishing infringement can require careful consideration of ownership, originality, access and whether a substantial part of the protected work has been reproduced.
Where similarities arise between competing creative works, obtaining specialist intellectual property advice at an early stage can help rights holders assess whether infringement has occurred and determine the most appropriate strategy for protecting or defending their position. Get in touch with Lawdit today to discuss this further.
