Taylor Swift Is 'Shaking Off' Claims Alleging Copyright Infringement

As music fans have come to learn from pop music over the years, playas are indeed gonna play.

Or are they?

As far as Taylor Swift is concerned, she isn't here to play regarding claims of alleged copyright infringement.

Swift's eight-year-old song "Shake It Off," the memorable first single from her landmark album where she crossed over into the pop market, has been the subject of a lawsuit brought forth by two songwriters who wrote the song "Playas Gon' Play" for the girl group 3LW over twenty years ago.

3LW rose to fame in the early aughts, and the group was responsible for launching the careers of Adrienne Bailon and Kiely Williams; the two singers may be best remembered by a particular generation for later starring in the 2003 Disney Channel Original Movie adaptation of "The Cheetah Girls" book series.

According to The Daily Mail, Sean Hall and Nathan Butler believe "Shake It Off" borrows lines from the 3LW song, originally released on the trio's debut album, released in 2000.

Swift is understandably feeling none too thrilled by the lawsuit.

The possibly engaged singer has responded to Hall and Butler's claims.

Swift delivered a passionate response where she attempted to put the allegations to rest.

"Until learning about Plantiff's claim in 2017, I had never heard the song 'Playas Gon' Play' and had never heard of that song or the group 3LW," her response began. [Swift's parents] "did not permit me to watch until I was about 13 years old. None of the CDs I listened to as a child, or after that, were by 3LW."

Swift continued to maintain she had never heard the song throughout.

"I had never the song 'Playas Gon' Play' on the radio, on television, or any film. The first time I ever heard the song was after the claim was made," she continued, "I recall hearing phrases about players play and haters hate stated together by other children while attending school in Wyomissing Hills, and in high school in Hendersonville. These phrases were akin to commonly used sayings like 'don't hate the playa, hate the game, 'take a chill pill 'and 'say it, don't spray it.'"

The Daily Mail also reports the lawsuit had been previously dismissed, but U.S. district judge Michael W. Fitzgerald then "allowed the case to go to trial after determining that a jury could find that she had plagiarized the lines."

As of this writing, it's difficult to answer this question. There seem to be many more steps to go with the lawsuit before it can be determined.

Butler and Hall took issue after the lawsuit had originally been dismissed by Fitzgerald when he claimed the lines in question were "too banal to count as copyright infringement."

The duo later filed an appeal which requested the situation go to trial and damages. The outlet also reported a federal appeals court had "reversed the original decision" two years after Fitzgerald had dismissed it, and Fitzgerald soon found it back on his radar.

"Even though there are some noticeable differences between the works," Fitzgerald later detailed, "there are also significant similarities in word usage and sequence/structure. Although Defendants' experts strongly refute the implication that there are substantial similarities, the Court is not inclined to overtly credit their opinions here," he continued. (via Billboard via Daily Mail)

Fitzgerald also stated, "The court cannot presently determine that no reasonable juror could find substantial similarity of lyrical phrasing, word arrangement, or poetic structure between the two works."

We know if Swift could have her version of events pertaining to the situation go forward, pondering the future of her recordings would not be a concern. However, it may be a while before Swifties are able to feast their eyes and ears on the re-recording of Swift's fifth record.

According to Talent Recap, "It's possible Swift's legal team will want to clear the song, before [the '1989' re-release]."