A high-stakes copyright fight is closing in on a moment that could alter how reggaeton is made, credited, and monetized.
According to Puck, the case was filed by representatives of Jamaican production duo Steely & Clevie, who argue that a defining rhythmic structure used throughout reggaeton originates in their late-1980s recordings.
Their claim centers on three tracks—an instrumental B-side and two dancehall releases—that they say laid the blueprint for what later became known as dembow. According to the lawsuit, that blueprint has been replicated in more than 100 songs without authorization.
Named defendants include major figures from Latin pop and urban music, such as Bad Bunny, Daddy Yankee, Luis Fonsi, and Pitbull. The artists are collectively represented by legal teams who argue that the lawsuit seeks to claim ownership of basic musical ingredients rather than a specific, protectable work.
Reggaeton took shape in the 1990s as Puerto Rican producers blended Jamaican dancehall rhythms with Spanish-language rap, building club records around a repeating, syncopated beat.
Over time, that sound moved from local scenes to global charts. Today, reggaeton artists regularly pull in tens of millions of monthly listeners on streaming platforms, making the financial exposure in this case significant.
The lawsuit has been working its way through federal court since 2022, when a judge consolidated multiple claims and allowed discovery to proceed.
Now the case sits in the summary judgment phase, where the court must decide whether the plaintiffs’ theory is strong enough to be heard by a jury. The core issue is whether rhythm—particularly a rhythmic “design” drawn from multiple songs—can qualify as original expression under copyright law.
Defense lawyers say no, arguing that the plaintiffs are pointing to common grooves and patterns that long predate the recordings at issue. Plaintiffs’ attorney Stephen Doniger has countered that dismissing rhythm as unoriginal reflects a narrow view of music history, one that favors melody while overlooking traditions where rhythm carries the creative weight.
During recent hearings, André Birotte Jr. has repeatedly asked both sides to spell out exactly what is being claimed. The asserted structure, he noted, does not exist neatly within a single track but across several recordings, raising questions about how copyright boundaries should be drawn.
A separate appellate ruling involving film copyright has also been introduced into the debate, reinforcing the idea that courts must remove unprotectable elements before assessing infringement.