Echoes of the Sphinx: The Plagiarism Controversy Surrounding Miley Cyrus’s Bass Persuades

Introduction: A Complicated Release

On September 18, Miley Cyrus marked a significant milestone in her decade-spanning career with the release of her tenth studio album, Bass Persuades. The project, characterized by a return to experimental pop and disco-infused soundscapes, was met with immediate acclaim from both critics and her devoted fanbase. Under normal circumstances, this would be a period of unadulterated celebration for the singer-songwriter. However, the launch has been marred by a brewing controversy that threatens to overshadow the album’s artistic merit: a public accusation of plagiarism leveled by French disco icon Amanda Lear.

The allegations center on the track "Red Lights," which Lear claims bears a striking, and uncredited, resemblance to her 1978 hit, "The Sphinx." While the music industry is no stranger to copyright disputes, this particular clash is unique, pitting a contemporary pop juggernaut against a legendary figure of the European disco era. As the debate rages online and in legal circles, it raises critical questions about the nature of musical inspiration, the ethics of retroactive credit, and the mounting pressure on artists in an increasingly litigious creative environment.

The Chronology of a Dispute

The conflict erupted into the public consciousness through the most modern of arenas: Instagram. Amanda Lear, a singer and actress whose career spans over five decades, took to her social media account to "thank" Miley Cyrus for what she sarcastically termed a "tribute" to her 1978 composition, "The Sphinx."

While the tone of the post was thinly veiled with irony, the underlying claim was serious. Lear alleged that the melodic structure, rhythmic pacing, and thematic essence of "Red Lights" were derived directly from her own work. According to Lear, she possesses no personal animosity toward Cyrus and, in fact, recognizes the younger artist as a genuine fan of her musical catalog. Lear explicitly stated that she believes Cyrus was intimately familiar with "The Sphinx" during the writing process for Bass Persuades.

Despite the high-profile nature of the accusation, Lear has maintained a surprisingly measured stance. She has clarified that she is not currently pursuing litigation. Instead, she has chosen to handle the matter through industry channels, engaging with her own producers and record label to explore the possibility of a retroactive songwriting credit. This move, while not a lawsuit, is a calculated attempt to secure acknowledgment and financial compensation for the perceived usage of her intellectual property.

Supporting Data: The Precedent of the Flowers Case

To understand why the music industry and the public are taking Lear’s claims seriously, one must look at the broader context of Miley Cyrus’s recent legal history. The "Red Lights" controversy does not exist in a vacuum; it follows on the heels of a significant ongoing lawsuit involving one of Cyrus’s biggest hits, "Flowers."

Two years ago, Tempo Music Investments—a firm holding a stake in Bruno Mars’s 2013 hit "When I Was Your Man"—filed a lawsuit against Cyrus. The plaintiffs argue that "Flowers" copies key melodic and lyrical elements from the Mars track. A direct comparison of the lyrics highlights the contention: where Mars sings, "I should’ve bought you flowers / And held your hand," Cyrus offers a mirror image: "I can buy myself flowers / … And I can hold my own hand."

Cyrus’s legal team has mounted a robust defense, arguing that these common phrases cannot be copyrighted and that the song functions as a transformative critique of traditional romantic expectations—a potential "fair use" argument. In February 2026, the team filed a motion for summary judgment, which remains pending.

The Flowers case is crucial to the current discourse. Legal analysts observe that plagiarism allegations against high-profile artists tend to cluster. When an artist is already defending one claim, the perception of "habitual" borrowing creates a narrative momentum that is difficult to stop. Even if the Lear dispute is ultimately resolved privately, the shadow of the Flowers litigation forces Cyrus’s team to tread carefully. Settling with Lear might be the path of least resistance to avoid opening a second, potentially damaging, legal front.

Official Responses and Industry Dynamics

The response to the Lear-Cyrus controversy has been profoundly polarized. On social media, the discourse has devolved into "name-calling," with factions of Cyrus’s fanbase dismissing Lear as a "grandma" chasing relevance, while critics of the singer argue that the similarities between "Red Lights" and "The Sphinx" are too egregious to ignore.

From an industry perspective, this case highlights the "inside baseball" nature of songwriting credits. In the streaming era, it has become increasingly common for artists to grant retroactive credits—often in response to threats of litigation—to avoid public trials and to secure a percentage of future royalties.

However, Lear is not a typical claimant. She is a woman of immense pedigree, having navigated the music, fashion, and film industries since the 1970s. Her reputation is not that of a "copyright troll." Her decision to use industry channels rather than an immediate lawsuit suggests a level of professional decorum that distinguishes her from many who initiate these claims. The fact that she has never before been involved in a plagiarism dispute gives her assertions a weight that the public cannot easily dismiss as a cash-grab.

Implications for the Future of Copyright

The implications of the Bass Persuades controversy are twofold: the immediate impact on the artists involved, and the long-term precedent for how pop music is composed.

The Myth of "Originality"

Musicologists have long argued that the boundaries between homage, influence, and plagiarism are becoming increasingly blurred. With the digital availability of virtually every song ever recorded, the subconscious—or conscious—incorporation of past sounds into new works is inevitable. The question remains: at what point does "inspiration" become "theft"? If the industry continues to move toward a model where every echoed chord progression or lyrical cadence requires a retroactive credit, the creative process may become stifled by the fear of litigation.

The Power of Social Media

Lear’s decision to air her grievances on Instagram is perhaps the most significant element of this story. By taking the dispute to the public, she forced a conversation that might otherwise have been settled behind closed doors. This reflects a shift in power dynamics: artists no longer need to wait for a court ruling to influence public perception. A single post can, for better or worse, define the narrative of an album launch.

Settlement vs. Litigation

Looking forward, the most likely outcome is a quiet settlement. Given the pending status of the Flowers case, Cyrus’s representatives are incentivized to keep the "Red Lights" issue out of the courtroom. A settlement, which would likely include an undisclosed financial agreement and a modest update to the songwriting credits on streaming platforms, would allow both parties to move forward without the reputational damage of a protracted public legal battle.

Conclusion: A Tame Dispute or a Warning Sign?

While the media has latched onto the drama, it is worth noting that this is not an existential threat to Cyrus’s career. The music industry is littered with similar disputes, and most are resolved with minimal long-term impact on the popularity of the artist.

However, the "Red Lights" case serves as a poignant reminder that the music industry is shifting. As intellectual property rights become more aggressively enforced, the "tribute" of yesteryear is now a potential liability. Whether Amanda Lear receives her due credit or not, her intervention has succeeded in one goal: it has reminded the world that, in the history of music, nothing is truly new, and every note carries a debt to the past.

For Miley Cyrus, the challenge will be to navigate these choppy legal waters without sacrificing the creative spontaneity that has defined her career. For the rest of the industry, the Lear-Cyrus dispute is a bellwether: the era of "borrowing" is coming to a close, replaced by an era of extreme scrutiny and the high cost of cultural memory. As the Flowers case continues to unfold and the Bass Persuades controversy settles into its next phase, the industry will be watching to see if the "Sphinx" of 1978 ultimately claims a seat at the table of modern pop.