She was accused of copying fellow musician Bruno Mars when writing her Grammy-winning 2023 single ‘Flowers’

Miley Cyrus has been given a disappointing update in her ‘Flowers’ copyright lawsuit, with lawyers on the other side of the argument saying they are ‘thrilled’ with the outcome.

Cyrus was accused of copying fellow musician Bruno Mars when writing her Grammy-winning 2023 single ‘Flowers’.

After being released, the song sky-rocketed straight to the global no. 1 spot, with fans finding particular poignancy in rumours that it was inspired by the breakdown of her marriage to ex-husband, Liam Hemsworth – from whom she split in 2020.

It bagged two prestigious accolades at the 2023 Grammys – Record of the Year, and Best Pop Solo Performance – before accusations of plagiarism tainted the track’s success.

Miley Cyrus in the video for ‘Flowers’ (Columbia)

Tempo Music Investments alleged that Cyrus and her team had ‘undeniably’ ripped off Mars’ 2012 single, ‘When I Was Your Man’.

Lyrics from the chorus of Mars’ number say: “I should have bought you flowers / and held your held / Should have give you all my hours / when I had the chance.”

Meanwhile, Cyrus’ chorus is: “I can buy myself flowers / write my name in the sand / talk to myself for hours / say things you don’t understand.”

It has now been confirmed that Cyrus will not be able to dismiss the copyright lawsuit, following an order denying the motion to dismiss on Tuesday 18 March.

People reports that, according to the order, Cyrus and her legal team had a ‘misunderstanding’ of the legal precedent surrounding what ‘exclusive’ means – something the judge deemed ‘incorrect’.

The order states: “Ownership of ‘exclusive rights’ is not to be conflated with ‘exclusive ownership’ of rights. The ‘exclusive rights’ are what is owned collectively by the co‐owners.”

Cyrus is accused of copying Bruno Mars’ song (Aaron J. Thornton/Getty Images for BET)

Co-writer Philip Lawrence’s interest was a ‘co‐ownership interest in the exclusive rights of the copyright’, it said, adding: “By transferring all of that interest, Tempo now steps into Lawrence’s shoes and is a co‐owner of the exclusive rights of the copyright.”

A lawyer for Tempo Music Investments told People in a statement that they are ‘thrilled’ but not ‘surprised’ by the ruling.

“Our client is looking forward to having this case proceed to be resolved on its merits and are extremely confident in prevailing,” the company’s attorney Alex Weingarten said.