Ed Sheeran is a “magpie” who allegedly borrows ideas from other artists to use in his songs, the High Court has heard.
The singer, 31, attended the copyright legal battle in person to hear two songwriters claim his 2017 hit Shape Of You rips off parts of their track Oh Why.
Sami Chokri and Ross O’Donoghue allege the song infringes “particular lines and phrases” of their composition.
Mr Sheeran and his co-authors on the song, Steven McCutcheon and John McDaid, began legal proceedings in May 2018, asking the High Court to declare they had not infringed Mr Chokri and Mr O’Donoghue’s copyright.
Two months later in July 2018, Mr Chokri and Mr O’Donoghue issued their own claim for “copyright infringement, damages and an account of profits in relation to the alleged infringement”.
The trial over the copyright dispute, expected to last three weeks, began at the Rolls Building in central London on Friday.
Mr Sheeran - worth an estimated £220 million - attended the hearing in person, wearing a dark suit and a tie.
Andrew Sutcliffe QC, for Mr Chokri and Mr O’Donoghue, said the question at the heart of the case is “How does Ed Sheeran write his music?” and whether he “makes things up as he goes along” in song writing sessions.
The barrister said: “Or is his song writing process in truth more nuanced and less spontaneous… involving the collection and development of ideas over time which reference and interpolate other artists. This is the defendants’ case.
“Mr Sheeran is undoubtedly very talented, he is a genius. But he is also a magpie.
“He borrows ideas and throws them into his songs, sometimes he will acknowledge it but sometimes he won’t.”
Mr Sutcliffe said this “depends on who you are and whether he thinks he can get away with it”.
The hooks of both Shape Of You and Oh Why were played in the courtroom.
Mr Sheeran made no reaction when part of Oh Why was played, or as part of his song was later heard on the court’s speakers.
Mr Sutcliffe added: “The similarity between the two hooks is striking and immediately apparent.
“They sound almost identical, they are such that an ordinary, reasonable, experienced listener might think that perhaps one had come from the other.
“This of course does not by itself prove that copying has taken place but it’s a vital starting point.”
Short clips of early versions of Shape Of You were later played in court and a clip of Mr Sheeran’s performance at Glastonbury in 2017 was shown.
Mr Sheeran’s lawyers previously told the court the singer and his co-writers have no recollection of having heard the song Oh Why before the legal battle and “vehemently deny” the allegations of copying.
Ian Mill QC, for Mr Sheeran and his two co-writers, discussed whether the case would cover if the three songwriters had allegedly subconsciously or consciously copied the hook of the song Oh Why.
“How can more than one person subconsciously copy something? That is completely inconceivable,” Mr Mill said.
He added a case of “conscious copying” against Mr Sheeran and his co-authors would require “all three to have known at the time of writing that they were copying Oh Why”.
The High Court also heard that PRS for music – the industry body that collects and distributes royalties – had suspended payment to Mr Sheeran and his co-writers for the performances or broadcasts of Shape Of You.
The song was a worldwide hit, becoming the best-selling song of 2017 in the UK and the most streamed song in the history of Spotify.
Mr Sutcliffe later acknowledged that the Shape Of You creators were “very famous and very successful”.
He added: “They have had many hits, they have created many records and they have won many awards.”
But the barrister said the case was not about “how famous the claimants are, it boils down to that the defendants are not”.
He added: “They are not Shaggy, Coldplay, Rihanna or Jay-Z, if they were they would have been treated in a very different way.”
He said Mr Chokri and Mr O’Donoghue “are not aspiring artists”.
The barrister continued: “They are songwriters and very talented, who deserve the same respect as any other artist and due recognition where recognition is due.”
The trial before Mr Justice Zacaroli continues, with judgment expected to be reserved until a later date.
