Miley Cyrus Flowers Lawsuit: Did the Hit Copy Bruno Mars?
Questions about this case?
AI Legal Assistant · free · answers in seconds · general information, not legal advice
The Miley Cyrus Flowers lawsuit is a copyright fight between music companies, not a class action. Tempo Music Investments, which bought one co-writer’s share of Bruno Mars’ “When I Was Your Man,” sued in federal court in Los Angeles in September 2024. A judge let the case go forward in March 2025. As of October 2026, Tempo has opposed Cyrus’ request to end the case without a trial, and we found no public ruling on it. Listeners and fans get nothing from this case and have nothing to file.
Editorially Reviewed — Content reviewed for accuracy using published legal research, government data, and verified court records. See our methodology
Reviewed by Leonard Goldberg, Editor · Last updated
What the Lawsuit Claims
“Flowers” was released on January 13, 2023, spent eight weeks at No. 1 on the Hot 100 and later won Record of the Year at the 66th Grammy Awards. Fans immediately heard it as an answer to Bruno Mars’ 2013 ballad: his “I should’ve bought you flowers” against her “I can buy myself flowers.”
The complaint goes further than the lyric. It alleges that “Flowers” duplicates “the melodic pitch design and sequence of the verse, the connecting bass-line, certain bars of the chorus,” lyric elements “and specific chord progressions.” Those are allegations, not findings.
The musical core is the harmony and the shape of the melody. A chord progression on its own is usually treated as a common building block — the same handful of chord progressions carry thousands of songs. That is why the case turns on whether the combination of melody, bass line, harmony and lyrics is protectable, not on any single chord.
Case Details
Tempo Music Investments, LLC v. Miley Cyrus et al., No. 2:24-cv-07910, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, filed September 16, 2024. The court’s calendar lists the case as 2:24-cv-07910-MRA-BFM, with Magistrate Judge Brianna Fuller Mircheff handling discovery matters. The March 2025 ruling on standing was signed by Judge Dean D. Pregerson.
The defendants are Cyrus, co-writers Gregory Hein and Michael Pollack, their publishers, Sony Music Entertainment, and a long list of distributors and retailers, including Apple, Amazon.com Services, Pandora, Deezer, Tidal, Live Nation, Target and Walmart. Bruno Mars and Philip Lawrence are not plaintiffs. The complaint seeks actual damages, including lost license fees, and the defendants’ profits, and it demands a jury trial.
Status: Standing Upheld, Summary Judgment Pending
Standing. Cyrus’ side argued that a buyer of one co-writer’s share cannot sue without the other co-owners. On March 18, 2025 Judge Pregerson disagreed: “Tempo now steps into Lawrence’s shoes and is a co-owner of the exclusive rights of the copyright,” and can sue “without joining the other co-owners.” Ownership of exclusive rights, the court reasoned, is not the same as exclusive ownership under Section 501(b).
Summary judgment. In late February 2026 Cyrus’ lawyers asked the court to end the case without a jury, arguing the songs share only “random, unprotectable elements” and commonplace breakup-song lyrics, with fair use as a fallback. Tempo answered on March 25, 2026, citing “undeniable similarities” and arguing that, at minimum, a jury should decide. As of October 6, 2026 we found no published ruling on that motion.
Follow this case
There's no claim deadline yet. We'll email you if a settlement opens a claim period.
Who Is Affected
This is a dispute between rights holders. The plaintiff is a music-catalog investor; the defendants are the songwriters, publishers, labels and the platforms that sell or stream the song.
If you streamed, bought or performed “Flowers,” you are not a party and not a class member. There is no class, no notice and nothing to join. Streaming services and retailers are named because they distribute the song, not because listeners did anything wrong.
Is There Any Money for Fans?
If Tempo won, the complaint asks for its actual damages (lost license fees and lost value of the song) plus the defendants’ profits from “Flowers.” If Cyrus wins summary judgment, the case ends without a trial, subject to appeal.
How cases like this one end
Our copy of the federal courts’ own case database covers 56,816 federal civil cases of this typeclosed in U.S. federal district courts between 2015 and 2025:
- 20.1% ended in a settlement recorded by the court. Another 57.3% were dismissed voluntarily, which often follows a private settlement — so the real settlement share sits between 20.1% and 77.4%.
- 2.1% were decided on a motion before any trial.
- 1 in 310 reached a trial (0.3%), after a median of 29.4 months.
- Median time from filing to the end of the case: 4.3 months.
- Only 1,959 of them (3.4%) record a money award at all; the median of those is $35,000.
These are base rates for this type of case (federal copyright cases) — not a prediction about this lawsuit, and not legal advice. Source: Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (civil), analysed by Settlement Insight. Cases heard in state courts are not included.
Miley Cyrus Flowers Lawsuit Timeline
- 1
January 13, 2023 — Flowers Released
The song tops the Hot 100 for eight weeks. Listeners connect its chorus to Bruno Mars’ 2013 hit “When I Was Your Man.”
- 2
September 16, 2024 — Tempo Sues
Tempo Music Investments, owner of co-writer Philip Lawrence’s share, files No. 2:24-cv-07910 in the Central District of California.
- 3
March 18, 2025 — Motion to Dismiss Denied
Judge Dean D. Pregerson rules that a buyer of one co-owner’s share can sue without the other co-owners.
- 4
February 2026 — Cyrus Seeks Summary Judgment
Her lawyers argue the songs share only unprotectable elements and breakup-song tropes, and raise fair use in the alternative.
- 5
March 25, 2026 — Tempo Opposes
Tempo cites “undeniable similarities” in the chorus and argues the question belongs to a jury.
- 6
October 2026 — Ruling Pending
As of October 6, 2026 we found no published decision on summary judgment and no trial date.
Three Things to Watch For
A celebrity case with the words “lawsuit” and “Spotify” in the headlines attracts a specific kind of bait:
“Claim your Flowers streaming payout”
Streaming platforms are defendants, which makes fake “listener refund” pages sound plausible. There is no listener class. A form asking for your Spotify, Apple or Amazon login is credential theft.
“Buy a share of the song rights”
The case is about a catalog investor, so expect pitches to “own a piece” of a hit before the verdict. Real catalog sales are private deals; a stranger selling royalty shares by message is not one.
“Verdict: Miley must pay millions” videos
No court has ruled on infringement. AI-voiced clips and posts announcing a verdict or a damages figure are invented and usually lead to ad farms or phishing links.
Miley Cyrus Flowers Lawsuit — Questions People Actually Ask
Who is suing Miley Cyrus over Flowers?
Tempo Music Investments, a company that bought the catalog of Philip Lawrence, one of the co-writers of “When I Was Your Man.” Bruno Mars himself is not a plaintiff.
What exactly is she accused of copying?
The complaint alleges that “Flowers” copies the verse melody’s pitch sequence, the connecting bass line, bars of the chorus, lyric elements and specific chord progressions. Cyrus denies it and says the songs share only unprotectable elements.
Did the judge throw the case out?
No. On March 18, 2025 the court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that Tempo can sue as a co-owner without the other co-owners. A separate motion for summary judgment, filed in February 2026, was still undecided as far as we could find on October 6, 2026.
Why is Bruno Mars not part of the lawsuit?
A co-owner of a copyright can sue on its own. Tempo holds Lawrence’s share and the court ruled it does not need Mars or the other co-writers to join. Whether they support the case is not stated in the filings we reviewed.
Can a chord progression be copyrighted?
Common progressions on their own are generally treated as building blocks anyone may use. Tempo’s theory is that the combination of melody, bass line, harmony and lyrics in the chorus is protected. That combination question is what the summary-judgment motion is about.
Is there a settlement or money for fans?
No. This is not a class action. There is no settlement, no fund and no claim form, and any damages would go to the copyright owner, not to listeners.
Why are Apple, Amazon and Walmart defendants?
The complaint names companies that stream, sell or distribute “Flowers,” because each distribution of an allegedly infringing work can be part of a copyright claim. It does not mean customers of those services are involved.
What happens next?
The court decides the summary-judgment motion. If it is granted, the case ends unless Tempo appeals. If it is denied, the case heads toward a jury trial or a private settlement between the companies.
Separate from this case: were you injured in the last 2 years?
Class-action payouts are fixed amounts through an administrator. A personal injury claim is a different case — and often worth far more. Free estimate, no obligation.
Related Consumer Brand Lawsuits
Copyright Damages Calculator
How actual damages, profits and statutory damages are measured
Open Class Action Settlements
Settlements that are actually taking claims right now
Settlement Payout Calculator
Estimate what a class member typically receives from a fund
Data Breach Settlement Calculator
Estimate a payout if your data was exposed in a breach