Plagiarism Bomb Hits Miley’s New Track

Microphone on a stand against a dark blurred background — Photo: AlienNation / Shutterstock

When plagiarism claims erupt in pop music, the headline is rarely the whole story; what matters is which parts of a song the accuser says were taken, how specific those overlaps are, and whether they concern protectable musical expression rather than a general vibe.

The Short Version

French singer Amanda Lear publicly accused Miley Cyrus of copying Lear’s 1978 track “The Sphinx” on Cyrus’s song “Redlights.”
Lear made the allegation directly on social media and reiterated it to AFP, citing “the same melody, the same rhythm.”
Reports say Lear’s label and publishers want acknowledgment of plagiarism; as of the initial coverage, no response from Cyrus’s camp was quoted.
The dispute centers on concrete, audio-structural similarity claims, not just influence or homage, which raises specific copyright questions.

What Happened: A Direct, On-Record Accusation Tied to Two Named Works

Amanda Lear, the French singer and cultural fixture whose career spans music, television, and art, publicly alleged that Miley Cyrus’s new track “Redlights,” from the album “Bass Persuades,” copies Lear’s 1978 song “The Sphinx.” In a pointed social post, Lear thanked Cyrus “for copying my song ‘The Sphinx’,” appending hashtags like “ripoff” and “copycat.” Lear then told AFP that her label, Universal, and the song’s publishers “want acknowledgment of the plagiarism,” and characterized the overlap as “the same melody, the same rhythm.” Multiple outlets carried these statements in the days immediately following Cyrus’s album release, anchoring the claim to identifiable recordings and specific musical elements rather than to a vague sense of homage. As of those reports, Cyrus’s side was not quoted with a public response.

Lear’s description matters for how such cases get evaluated. She is not alleging mere stylistic resemblance; she names melody and rhythm—the former being the most litigated element in music copyright—in a way that points to a focused, bar-by-bar comparison. She also indicated that a producer and her record company listened and concluded it was “total plagiarism,” an assertion reported alongside the social post that drew initial attention to the issue.

How Music Copyright Assesses “Similarity”: Melody Carries Most Weight

Copyright law protects original expression in a composition—melody, and in some contexts distinctive rhythm or harmony—rather than a general feel or shared genre tropes. In practice, most successful music-copying claims hinge on melodic material because melody is the most identifiable and protectable component; rhythm-only claims rarely prevail. Courts and experts therefore ask two linked questions: was there copying of the plaintiff’s work (proved directly or circumstantially, often via “access” and probative similarity), and if so, does the copying rise to “substantial similarity” of protectable elements. This is why accusers who can point to a recurring hook or theme line that tracks pitch-for-pitch and rhythm-for-rhythm have the strongest footing, while arguments about overall aura, production texture, or common chord loops generally falter.

Because these inquiries turn on musical specifics, litigants often retain forensic musicologists to transcribe, align, and compare motifs across sections—verse, pre-chorus, chorus—normalizing key and tempo as needed. The analysis distinguishes protectable expression from unprotectable building blocks: scalar runs, generic cadences, stock rhythmic cells, and ubiquitous chord progressions. Only after filtering out those common elements does any remaining overlap count toward substantial similarity. That is the crucible Lear’s melody-and-rhythm claim would enter if it moved forward.

Why This Claim Landed With Force: Specificity, Timing, and Identifiable Hooks

Three factors give Lear’s allegation traction in the public conversation. First, specificity: she names two songs and pinpoints melody and rhythm, inviting a concrete audio comparison rather than a debate about inspiration. Second, timing: the claim surfaced immediately after the album’s release, suggesting contemporaneous listening and minimizing hindsight bias. Third, authorship stake: Lear emphasizes that she wrote the lyrics to “The Sphinx” and that her publishers and label support seeking acknowledgment, underscoring that rightsholders see a protectable core at issue. These are the ingredients that make a plagiarism story persist rather than dissipate as chatter.

The nature of the tracks also matters. “The Sphinx” is a late-1970s single associated with Lear’s catalog; “Redlights” is positioned by Cyrus as a signature cut on “Bass Persuades,” making any perceived overlap most salient where pop songs lodge themselves: in the chorus hook, the topline contour, and the rhythmic placement that drives memorability. If those loci truly align—same intervallic contour, phrase length, and syncopation across analogous sections—copyright doctrine takes a harder look.

What Would Settle the Question: A Focused, Bar-by-Bar Comparison

In disputes like this, clarity comes from a disciplined side-by-side. A rigorous analysis would: transcribe both works’ main hooks and secondary motifs; normalize key and tempo to remove production differences; compare phrase structure, interval patterns, and rhythmic cells; and test whether the alleged overlap persists across a substantial portion of the song or is confined to a brief commonplace figure. Experts also review access evidence—who worked on the accused track, their listening history, and whether internal demos show convergence or independent creation. Where alignment remains after filtering out clichés and common progressions, plaintiffs have leverage for credits or settlement; where it evaporates, claims typically stall.

Courts and negotiators care less about social-media temperature and more about the map of notes and durations. That is why seemingly similar songs often survive scrutiny: musical language has finite materials, and pop idioms recycle effective shapes. Conversely, a hook that marches in lockstep with a prior work, measure after measure, tends to yield credits, licensing, or litigation risk—outcomes familiar to anyone who has watched high-profile cases resolve before reaching a jury.

The release of "Bass Persuades" was intended to launch the next phase of Miley Cyrus's career, but just two days later, the album made headlines for a different reason. Amanda Lear recognized a track of hers from nearly half a century ago in the song "Red Lights"It's plagiarism.

— wojtek grzesik (@wojtekgrze2) September 21, 2026

Where the Dispute Stands and What to Watch Next

As reported, Lear has made a public, attributable allegation; her label and publishers seek acknowledgment; and the comparison centers on melody and rhythm between “The Sphinx” and “Redlights.” No formal filings were cited in initial coverage, and Cyrus’s team had not been quoted responding in those reports. Two developments would meaningfully advance the story. First, a published expert analysis—transcriptions, audio-aligned excerpts, or a musicologist’s report—would allow the public and the industry to assess substance rather than headline heat. Second, any movement by the rightsholders—credit updates, statements from labels or publishers, or legal action—would clarify whether the dispute remains rhetorical or has entered the structured terrain where evidence, not perception, governs outcomes.