Reader answer checklist
This guide is structured to answer the practical questions a reader should resolve before relying on the topic.
- Direct answer
- VMG Salsoul held in the Ninth Circuit that a de minimis defense can apply to certain sound-recording sampling claims, creating a conflict with Bridgeport in the Sixth Circuit.
- Who this is for
- Artists, producers, labels, and clearance teams evaluating a sample connected to Ninth or Sixth Circuit litigation risk.
- Practical example
- A short sample may be analyzed differently depending on the governing jurisdiction, but a team should not treat the circuit split as automatic permission to release it.
- Limits and exceptions
- The decision is jurisdiction-specific and fact-specific, and composition rights, contractual promises, and other claims may remain even when a master claim is disputed.
- What to do next
- Identify the copied rights and governing jurisdiction, then obtain clearance or qualified legal advice before release.
Evidence records
verified- VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Ciccone — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 824 F.3d 871 (2016)
Source records identify the evidence to review; they do not replace a claim-by-claim legal review. See the source index for the audit trail.
Editorial record
verified- Last edited
- 2026-07-17
- Reviewed
- 2026-08-07
- Reviewer
- Michael Ruiz
Reviewed by Michael Ruiz on 2026-08-07. Recheck date-sensitive rules and contract terms for a specific matter. See the editorial policy for the review process.
VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Ciccone, 824 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2016)
This landmark case created a profound federal circuit split in music sampling, explicitly rejecting the 6th Circuit's Bridgeport precedent.
The Infringement Details
VMG Salsoul sued pop superstar Madonna and producer Shep Pettibone, alleging they sampled a 0.23-second horn hit from Salsoul Orchestra's "Ooh I Love It (Love Break)" and incorporated it into the hit song "Vogue."
The 9th Circuit Ruling
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Madonna, holding that the de minimis exception does apply to sound recordings.
The court ruled that a sample is non-infringing if it is so brief or obscured that an average, ordinary listener would not recognize it: > *"We clarify that the de minimis exception applies to sound recordings, just as it applies to all other copyrightable works."*
The Circuit Split
This created an active circuit split between the 6th Circuit (no de minimis exception for masters) and the 9th Circuit (de minimis exception applies). Because the 9th Circuit includes California (Los Angeles, the entertainment capital), this split creates a dual-standard: - A sample may be legally non-infringing in California (9th Circuit). - The exact same sample is an automatic copyright infringement in Tennessee (6th Circuit). - Because digital streaming distributes tracks nationwide, rights holders must navigate this with extreme legal caution.