By Sarah Anderson. Upon reading the title of this week’s blog post, you might be wondering, “what does interpolation even mean?” By definition, “interpolation” means “something that is introduced or inserted: an addition or insertion.”[1] Within the realm of popular music, interpolation is commonly used to refer to the act of inserting a melody from a previously recorded song by re-recording it to be a part of a newly created song. Of course, interpolation is not limited to re-recorded melodies, but extends to lyrics as well.[2] Essentially, interpolation results when an artist borrows a portion of a song they like that’s already in existence and attempts to re-record it and present it in their new song in a slightly altered way.

Interpolation has been popular among recording artists in recent years, for a few reasons. First, because interpolation is not a method resulting in a direct copy and paste of lyrics or melody, it is distinct from sampling.[3] Instead, interpolation only implicates a song’s composition copyrights—not the sound recording copyright.[4] An option with fewer legal consequences is always preferred, right? Second, interpolation exists as a sort of strategy that allows an artist to pull the most familiar, interesting portions of previous songs while also being able to re-vamp or revive it into something even better. After all, if the portion of the existing song was already catchy and popular, why not re-record it and turn it into something even better? As producer Joe Khajadourian stated for Rolling Stone, “If an interpolation is going to make the record special, it has to stay in.”[5]

The trick with interpolation within musical works, however, is getting that balance just right. Often times, the artist may not want to re-record a melody to be too distinct and unfamiliar from the original, as that was the inspiring portion of the song. However, without permission from the previous artist or writing credits on the new song, that artist can find himself in the middle of a copyright infringement lawsuit. It’s possible that a transformative interpolation can constitute a fair use, but musicians typically have avoided raising fair use defenses.

But what happens when one merely wishes to take inspiration from a melody or pay homage to the original artist for such inspiration? Insert Olivia Rodrigo, the overnight sensation of 2021.[6] During lockdown, Rodrigo had penned many songs and originally planned to release a largely piano-driven based EP, however, her song “Driver’s License” turned out to be so much bigger.[7] This song even earned Rodrigo a public cosign from her idol, Taylor Swift, on Instagram[8]—but Rodrigo did not stop there. After “Driver’s License” came “Déjà Vu,” which quickly crushed any notions of Rodrigo becoming a mere one-hit-wonder, and later the debut album Sour was released.[9]

It was no secret that Taylor Swift was one of Rodrigo’s inspirations, but as it turns out, Swift has a few writing credits, too.[10] Rodrigo’s song “1 step forward, 3 steps back,” had many Swift fans thinking that Swift herself had collaborated on the song, as the piano chorus sounded strikingly similar to the piano chorus in Swift’s 2017 song “New Year’s Day.”[11] But no—Swift and Jack Antonoff are given writing credit for the interpolation instead.[12]

Additionally, Swift is also given songwriting credits in Rodrigo’s “Déjà Vu”.[13] Rodrigo openly admitted that “Déjà Vu” was inspired by Swift’s “Cruel Summer,” but some found the songs’ bridges altogether too similar.[14] While the bridge in “Cruel Summer” starts at 2:27 and incorporates the phrase “I don’t wanna keep secrets just to keep you,” Rodrigo’s “Déjà Vu” begins the bridge at 2:50 and, in a similar fashion, incorporates the phrase “Do you get déjà vu?” in the same spot. The two bridges even seem to follow the same beat and repetitive “vibe” when played in unison.

As we can see from the credits in Rodrigo’s album Sour, interpolation is not a practice without its potential legal consequences. As one might imagine, constant repetitions of key melodies from a previously recorded song into a new song could instigate confusion. We can only imagine the outcome if Swift was not welcoming and supportive of the young Rodrigo but instead took Rodrigo to court. To avoid the dangers of a copyright infringement lawsuit, new artists hoping to pay homage to their existing musical idols would do well to seek permission from such idols before interpolating melodies and phrases into their own work, and even after such permission is obtained, staying within the boundaries of fair use.[15]

---

[1] Interpolation, Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary (11th ed. 2020).

[2] See generally Roberts v. Gordy, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198074, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2015) (discussing the interpolation of the phrase “Everyday I’m hustlin’” from Hustlin’ into Party Rock Anthem’s “Everyday I’m shufflin’”).

[3] Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Rhyme Syndicate Music, 376 F.3d 615, 619 (6th Cir. 2004).

[4] Id. at n.3

[5] Elias Leight, Why You’re Hearing More Borrowed Lyrics and Melodies on Pop Radio, Rolling Stone, (Oct. 11, 2021), https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/why-youre-hearing-more-borrowing-on-pop-radio-627837/.  

[6] Joe Coscarelli, ‘Driver’s License’ Is A Runway Hit. See How Olivia Rodrigo Made Her No. 1 Song., N.Y. Times, (Sept. 26, 2021), https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/arts/music/olivia-rodrigo-drivers-license.html.

[7] Al Newstead, Meet Olivia Rodrigo, the 17-year-old with the biggest song in the world right now, ABC News, (Oct. 1, 2021), https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/news/musicnews/meet-olivia-rodrigo-drivers-license-biggest-song-in-the-world/13057678.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Al Newstead, What’s “interpolating”, and how did it force Olivia Rodrigo to share Déjà vu writing Credits with Taylor Swift, (Oct. 1, 2021), https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/news/musicnews/olivia-rodrigo-taylor-swift-deja-vu-interpolation/13443342.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Christina Cannady, Music analysis: The bridges of “Cruel Summer” and “Déjà Vu” are too similar, (Oct. 11, 2021), https://baylorlariat.com/2021/04/13/music-analysis-the-bridges-of-cruel-summer-and-deja-vu-are-too-similar/.

[15] See 17 U.S.C. §107 (2018) ([F]air use factors to be considered shall include: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.).