LOS ANGELES — JULY 13, 2025 —
Major developments have emerged in the landmark copyright case between Steely & Clevie Productions Ltd. and a long list of defendants including reggaeton and Latin hitmakers. The case, currently unfolding in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, now features three critical filings.
The plaintiffs — Cleveland “Clevie” Browne, the estates of Wycliffe “Steely” Johnson and Ephraim “Count Shelly” Barrett, and Steely & Clevie Productions Ltd. — assert that the Dem Bow Riddim, used in over 1800 global hits, originated solely from their 1989 composition Fish Market. These filings include: a declaration from expert witness Peter Ashbourne-Firman CD; a motion for partial summary judgment; and a motion to exclude rebuttal testimony from one of the defense’s main experts, Dr. Peter Manuel.
Peter Ashbourne-Firman Declares the Beat Original and Unmatched
Ashbourne, a graduate of Berklee College of Music and one of Jamaica’s most respected composers and musicologists, submitted his expert declaration on July 4, 2025. With credits ranging from Bob Marley to Paul Simon, his statement provides forensic-level musicological analysis in support of Steely & Clevie’s claim that the now-ubiquitous Dem Bow rhythm — foundational to modern Latin music — originated with Fish Market.
In his detailed seven-page declaration, Ashbourne identifies and compares specific musical elements — including kick, snare, hi-hat, tom, and timbales patterns — present in Fish Market, Shabba Ranks’ Dem Bow, and Pounder Dub Mix II. He concludes that the combination of these elements constitutes an original, protectable work, noting their unique arrangement, instrumentation, and performance techniques — especially the “ghost notes” in the snare pattern.
“I found no work predating ‘Fish Market’ that used this specific combination of musical elements in the same or even similar way,” Ashbourne stated. “While some elements may exist individually, their integration and expression in this composite form were not common at the time of its creation.”
Ashbourne’s findings directly challenge the defense’s expert, Dr. Joe Bennett, whose January 2025 report aimed to broaden the context of the rhythm’s origin. Ashbourne dismissed Bennett’s conclusions as incomplete and lacking in proper musical analysis of the composite pattern.
Motion for Partial Summary Judgment: Originality, No Prior Art, and Industry Acknowledgment
In a 42-page legal filing, also submitted on July 4, Steely & Clevie’s legal team moved for partial summary judgment. They assert not only the originality of the Dem Bow Riddim, but also that the defendants have no credible evidence disputing the origin or independent creation of the rhythm.
“There is no genuine dispute that Steely & Clevie independently created the Dem Bow Riddim,” the motion reads, “and that the combination of its rhythmic and bass elements does not exist in any known work before its 1989 creation.”
Key Arguments From the Filing:
-
Originality & Creation: The plaintiffs detail how each rhythmic element — including tambourine and bassline — forms a unique arrangement not heard in any earlier work.
-
Lack of Prior Art: Even after extensive searching by defense experts, no pre-1989 examples match the composite of Fish Market.
-
Defendants’ Legal Misinterpretation: The motion accuses the defense of “conflating originality with novelty,” applying a higher standard than U.S. copyright law requires.
-
Industry Acknowledgment: The plaintiffs cite expert testimony, interviews with reggaeton pioneers like DJ Nelson, and even video demonstrations by defense expert Dr. Wayne Marshall that affirm Steely & Clevie’s work as the root of the Dem Bow beat.
Motion to Exclude Defense Expert Dr. Peter Manuel
To further strengthen their case, the plaintiffs also filed a motion to exclude the rebuttal expert testimony of Dr. Peter Manuel, arguing that his report is “irrelevant, unreliable, and legally flawed.”
Core Criticisms in the Motion:
-
Improper Rebuttal: Instead of responding directly to the plaintiffs’ experts (Ashbourne, Finell, and Bilby), Manuel introduces entirely new arguments that should have been disclosed earlier.
-
Misstating Copyright Law: Manuel applied an incorrect legal standard, implying that originality requires a work to be “the first of its kind” — a notion rejected under U.S. copyright law.
-
Flawed Musicological Methods: Manuel’s analysis allegedly relies on cherry-picked examples, unverified YouTube videos, and even a folk tune (Drunken Sailor) — none of which are formally analyzed or supported with evidence.
-
Duplicative and Biased Testimony: The plaintiffs say his report adds nothing new beyond the opinions already given by other defense experts and includes “improper personal attacks,” labeling the plaintiffs’ reports “useless” and accusing them of deception — a direct violation of federal expert conduct.
If successful, this motion would eliminate a central pillar of the defense and reinforce the plaintiffs’ position that the Dem Bow riddim was independently and originally created in Jamaica.
Why This Case Matters
Together, these filings present a unified legal and musicological front in a case that could redefine authorship and ownership in modern popular music. With billions of streams and millions in royalties tied to reggaeton’s rhythmic identity, the outcome of this trial could reshape how legacy Jamaican creators are recognized — both in the courtroom and in the culture.
Arguments on all three motions are scheduled for September 26, 2025, in Los Angeles.
