Meat Loaf Settles Longtime Copyright Infringement Battle Over “I’d Do Anything for Love”

Photo Credit: Egghead06 / CC by 3.0

Singer Meat Loaf has reached a deal to end a copyright dispute over his hit single, “I’d Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That)”.

The agreement resolves allegations that Meat Loaf (real name Michael Aday) stole the song over 24 years ago.

A dismissal for the suit was filed Wednesday in California federal court. The lawsuit was filed in 2017 by Enclosed Music LLC, who accused Meat Loaf of ripping off the tune. The complaint said the tune was initially copyrighted by Jon Dunmore Sinclair, whose catalog the company owns.

Another defendant, James Richard Steinman, is credited as the song’s composer.

Both parties have been working for the better part of two years to settle. U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin signed off on a deal in February to allow either side to reopen the case if they weren’t satisfied by the terms.

The latest stipulation dismisses the allegations with prejudice, meaning neither side can refile their claims. Both sides must pay their own attorney fees and other costs associated with the case. Both sides were contacted for a comment about the issue, but neither party responded for comment.

“I’d Do Anything for Love” released in 1993 as a single on Meat Loaf’s Bat Out of Hell II: Back Into Hell album. The album was a commercial success and sold over 14 million copies across the globe.

Defendant Enclosed Music says Steinman had access to the song Dunmore wrote. Dunmore filed for copyright registration when attorney Howard Siegel represented both.

“The concurrent representation of two songwriter clients lends an inference that, during a visit with Mr. Siegel, Mr. Steinman would have had a reasonable opportunity to view, hear, and/or copy the original song before composing the infringing song.”

Meat Loaf argued that Enclosed Music’s infringement claim rested on the loose theory that the songs were similar. He argued that the short lyrical phrase “I would do anything for” is the only concrete commonality between the two songs. The phrase is unprotectable as a matter of law as a short and well-known phrase.