Connection lost
Server error
VMG SALSOUL, LLC v. CICCONE Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Ninth Circuit held that a 0.23-second horn sample in Madonna’s song “Vogue” was a de minimis use, not copyright infringement. The court created a circuit split by ruling that the de minimis defense applies to sound recording sampling, rejecting a stricter, bright-line rule.
Legal Significance: This case established that the traditional de minimis copying defense applies to copyright infringement claims for sound recordings in the Ninth Circuit. It created a circuit split by explicitly rejecting the Sixth Circuit’s bright-line rule in Bridgeport Music that any unauthorized sampling is per se infringement.
VMG SALSOUL, LLC v. CICCONE Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff VMG Salsoul, LLC (VMG) owned the copyrights to the musical composition and sound recording of the song “Love Break.” VMG alleged that producer Shep Pettibone, while creating the song “Vogue” for Madonna, digitally sampled a 0.23-second, four-note horn chord from “Love Break.” For the purposes of summary judgment, the court assumed that this sampling, or actual copying, occurred. The sampled horn hit was then modified for its use in “Vogue”: it was transposed to a different key, truncated to make it “punchier,” and layered with other sounds and effects. This modified sample appeared only a handful of times in “Vogue,” where it was integrated with numerous other instrumental tracks. VMG sued Madonna, Pettibone, and others for infringement of both its composition and sound recording copyrights. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding any copying was de minimis.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the de minimis copying defense, which requires that a taking be substantial enough for an ordinary audience to recognize the appropriation, apply to copyright infringement claims involving the digital sampling of a sound recording?
Yes. The court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the de minimis copying defense, which requires that a taking be substantial enough for an ordinary audience to recognize the appropriation, apply to copyright infringement claims involving the digital sampling of a sound recording?
Conclusion
This decision solidifies the de minimis defense for sound recording sampling within Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud
Legal Rule
The de minimis use defense applies to copyright infringement claims for both Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in vo
Legal Analysis
The Ninth Circuit first determined that the alleged copying was de minimis Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor inc
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The de minimis copying defense applies to copyright infringement claims for
