Mariah Carey emerged victorious in a high-profile copyright battle after a federal judge in Los Angeles dismissed claims that her holiday classic “All I Want for Christmas Is You” infringed upon another song.
U.S. District Judge Mónica Ramírez Almadani issued her ruling Wednesday, determining that Carey’s 1994 seasonal anthem was not sufficiently similar to a 1989 track bearing the same title by songwriters Troy Powers and Andy Stone, who performs under the stage name Vince Vance.
The lawsuit, originally filed in November 2023, sought at least $20 million in damages from Carey, her co-writer Walter Afanasieff and their record label, Sony Music.
Powers and Stone alleged Carey had unlawfully copied their earlier composition, marking the second attempt by Stone’s legal team to pursue copyright claims against the pop superstar.
However, Judge Almadani found the plaintiffs’ arguments lacking merit, citing expert analysis from a musicologist who concluded the two songs shared only generic holiday music themes.
The judge noted specifically that while both tracks contain “commonplace Christmas song clichés,” their chord structures and harmonic rhythms were “very different.”
“Based on the foregoing, plaintiffs have not met their burden of showing that Carey and Vance are substantially similar under the extrinsic test,” Judge Almadani wrote in her decision.
The judge further criticized Stone and his attorneys for presenting “frivolous legal arguments” and including “irrelevant and unsupported statements of fact” in their complaint.
As a result, the plaintiffs were ordered to reimburse Carey for a portion of the legal expenses she incurred defending herself against the allegations.
Carey’s holiday hit, co-written with Afanasieff, has become synonymous with the Christmas season, regularly topping music charts worldwide and generating substantial revenue annually.
The song has been streamed billions of times and remains one of the most recognizable holiday tunes ever recorded.
Representatives for Carey, Sony Music and the plaintiffs have not publicly commented on the ruling.