Travis Scott, SZA, and Future Facing Lawsuit for Alleged Copyright Infringement Over 2023 Hit “Telekinesis”

Blockbuster Copyright Lawsuit Filed

With only a week left until 2025, the first blockbuster copyright lawsuit of the year has already been filed in a New York court.

According to legal documents obtained by MBW, Travis Scott, SZA, and Future are being sued by an artist signed to RocNation, Victoria Boyd, and her publishing company, Songs of Glory, for allegedly copying her song, What does it sound like, to create their hit in 2023, Telekinesis.

Telekinesis has been streamed over 413 million times on Spotify alone. It is featured on Scott’s chart-topping album, No. 1 album in the US, Utopia (Cactus Jack/Epic Records/Sony Music).

Details of the Allegation

The lawsuit, filed on Wednesday (Jan. 8), also names Cactus Jack, Epic Records, and Sony Music Entertainment as defendants. Scott’s brand partner, luxury watchmaker Audemar Piguet (AP), is also included in the suit.

In the lawsuit, Boyd claims she “wrote the lyrics, then completed and published a demo” called “What does it sound like” in November 2019, which she shared with Kanye West via voice note.

According to Boyd’s lawsuit, “based on information and belief,” Kanye West intended to release a song titled Future rebound, later renamed Future sounds, and then Ultrasound. It is alleged that all versions of these renamed songs are based on Boyd’s work.

However, when Kanye West released his album Donda in 2021, none of these alternate versions featuring Boyd’s original work were included, which is documented as “copyrighted and registered in the Library of Congress under registration number SR 986-420.1.”

Subsequently, Boyd claims that Kanye West played this song for Travis Scott. She alleges that her song Like the way it sounds was left “in a studio in Wyoming,” allowing Scott access to “create the infringing work based on the original.”

Scott is then said to have shared Boyd’s song with SZA and Future, asking them to collaborate in creating Telekinesis by copying the original work, to which they allegedly agreed in May 2023.

Telekinesis was officially released on July 28, 2023.

According to the lawsuit: “On information and belief, in 2023, Scott, SZA, Future, and all of the defendants knowingly and willfully copied Plaintiff’s original work, particularly the song lyrics, when they commercially released the infringing work.”

Claim of Infringement and Legal Actions

The information page for Telekinesis on Spotify lists Victoria Boyd and Kanye West (aka You) among the co-authors. Although West is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, several co-sponsors are mentioned. You can read the full lawsuit here.

Boyd alleges that when the defendants commercially released the infringing work, i.e., Telekinesis, she was listed as a co-author in the metadata provided to digital streaming platforms but was “unaware” that her song had been “copied and released commercially.”

Furthermore, Boyd noted that she intended to finalize her original work and release it under her recording agreement with RocNation.

Additionally, in the lawsuit, Boyd claims that in November 2023, the watchmaker AP reached out to her for permission to use Telekinesis commercially as part of an advertising campaign, knowing that the work was a copy of her original.

Boyd asserts she had no communication from the other defendants regarding this agreement and, lacking permission to use the original work, she declined to grant AP any rights.

On December 1, 2023, Boyd explains that her publishing administrator, Kobalt Publishing, under Boyd’s direction, “refused to give AP permission” because Scott and the others allegedly never obtained her consent to use her song for their creation.

On that same date, it is claimed that Boyd’s representative “notified all defendants that Boyd objected to the scheduled broadcast of Telekinesis.

On December 4, 2023, the defendants and AP allegedly proceeded to publish and commercially release an advertising campaign using the disputed works, despite Boyd’s objections.

“Plaintiff will suffer substantial and irreparable harm if Defendants are permitted to continue to infringe pending a determination of this claim.”

Lawsuit filed by Victoria Boyd

The lawsuit claims that Scott’s Telekinesis copies various elements of Boyd’s song Like the way it sounds, including, but not limited to, the song lyrics.

The following original lines from Telekinesis are cited in the lawsuit: “I see the future looks like we’re aligning with the sky, I can’t wait to live in glory in eternal life, you won’t take the wheel, and I’ll sit back and I’ll sit still – might as well get up now. He showed up without warning, listen to the trumpets, do you like the sound of it?”

The complaint states: “Significant, substantial, and original aspects” of Boyd’s What does it sound like are repeated in the disputed work Telekinesis and are the predominant, recognizable elements of the infringing piece.

Boyd’s attorneys argue that “substantial, essential and original aspects of Boyd’s song What does it sound like are not in dispute” because defendants have recently tried to suggest that Boyd authored only 8% of the infringing work (Telekinesis).

The lawsuit goes on to claim: “As a result, each copy of each of the different versions of the infringing work infringes upon the original work, as do any downloads, streams, or music videos of Telekinesis.”

Additionally, Boyd’s lawsuit claims that “each time Scott, SZA, or Future performed or played Telekinesis, the defendants collectively infringed the copyright of the plaintiff’s original work.”

It further adds: “To date, each of the defendants has reproduced, distributed, publicly performed, and/or authorized the reproduction, distribution, and public performance of the infringing composition and sound recording Telekinesis. The defendants continue to infringe upon the plaintiff’s original work.”

Boyd is seeking a jury trial, with her legal team arguing that she is “entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief under 17 USC § 502, restraining defendants from further infringing or broadcasting the plaintiff’s original copyrighted work.”

According to the complaint, Boyd “will suffer substantial and irreparable harm if defendants are allowed to continue infringing pending a determination of this action.”