Olivia Dean's 'I've Seen It' and 'Just the Two of Us': The Copyright Claim Explained

A company described in reports as Bill Withers’ publisher has sued Olivia Dean’s record label and music publishers in a US federal court, alleging that her song ‘I’ve Seen It’ copies the melody of ‘Just the Two of Us’. As reported, the filing does not name Dean herself as a defendant. This is a civil copyright case in Los Angeles, not a UK or criminal one, and everything below is as of about 20:00 BST on Saturday 3 October 2026. A complaint is one side’s allegations, and nothing has been decided.

What has been filed, and where?

On Thursday 1 October 2026, Mattie Music Group, doing business as Bleunig Music, filed a civil copyright infringement complaint in the US District Court for the Central District of California, in Los Angeles (Case No. 2:26-cv-11383). The case is captioned Mattie Music Group v. Capitol Records, LLC. A public copy of the docket lists the complaint, a copyright registration certificate attached as an exhibit and a civil cover sheet, all dated 1 October. Press reports on 2 and 3 October are reporting dates, not filing dates. We could not retrieve the complaint itself, so its wording below comes from press reports.

Reports describe Mattie Music Group as the publisher of Bill Withers’ catalogue. Withers died in 2020, and nothing reported alleges anything against him. “Just the Two of Us” has three credited writers, and we have not seen what share of it the plaintiff controls, so we do not state one.

Is Olivia Dean being sued?

Not according to the reports we reviewed: the defendants are her record label, its parent company and two music publishers, and Dean and her co-writers are not named. Trade-press reporting lists Capitol Records, LLC; Universal Music Group, Inc.; Sony Publishing (US) LLC; Kobalt Music Publishing America, Inc.; and 50 unnamed “Doe” defendants, a common US device for parties not yet identified. Capitol is part of Universal.

Several separate reports agree that Dean, Bastian Langebaek and Max Wolfgang, the credited writers of ‘I’ve Seen It’, are not defendants, and the docket’s party field lists only the plaintiff and Capitol Records, LLC. Some headlines use shorthand such as “sued”, but the articles we could read say she is not a defendant. The coverage does not explain why the plaintiff chose these defendants, and we do not guess.

What are the two songs involved?

The song at the centre of the claim, ‘I’ve Seen It’, is the 2:06 closing track of Olivia Dean’s 2025 album The Art of Loving, written by Dean, Bastian Langebaek and Max Wolfgang. The album came out on 26 September 2025 on Capitol and Polydor and reached number one on the UK Albums Chart and number three on the US Billboard 200. Dean, who is British, won British Album of the Year at the 2026 Brit Awards and Best New Artist at the 2026 Grammys.

“Just the Two of Us” first appeared on Grover Washington Jr.’s 1980 album Winelight, with Bill Withers singing, and came out as a single in February 1981. Credited to Withers, Ralph MacDonald and William Salter, it reached number two on the US Billboard Hot 100 and won the Grammy for Best R&B Song. None of this bears on the legal question; it is background.

What does the complaint allege about the two songs?

The complaint alleges that ‘I’ve Seen It’ copies the melody of ‘Just the Two of Us’. Trade reports quote it as alleging “repeated copying of the distinctively protectable melody”. As reported, it also says the shared musical features are so numerous and striking that they point to copying rather than coincidence, and it relies on a musicologist hired by the plaintiff, who is reported to have found substantial similarities in protectable expression. That is the plaintiff’s evidence, not a court finding.

Because we could not read the complaint, we cannot say which bars, hook, harmony or lyrics are alleged to match. The coverage describes the melody only, and none of it describes sampling the 1980 recording. One report says the complaint also alleges the writers had a reasonable opportunity to hear the original; we found that in only one place. In broad terms, US law asks whether the plaintiff owns a valid copyright and whether the defendant copied protected elements of it. That is background on how such cases are framed, not a view on this one.

Did the publisher raise the issue before suing?

According to reports of the complaint, yes: the publisher says it sent written notice to the defendants in August 2026, and one trade report gives the date as about 17 August. The same reports say the publisher first heard ‘I’ve Seen It’ that month, almost a year after its 26 September 2025 release, and alleges the defendants kept distributing the song after the notice. Those are the publisher’s allegations, not established facts, and we have not seen the letter.

What is the publisher asking the court for?

It is asking for money and a court order: damages and profits, or statutory damages, plus a permanent injunction. As reported, the statutory option is up to US$150,000 per work if the infringement is found to be wilful, which is the ceiling the US statute allows. The complaint also seeks interest, costs, legal fees and the seizure or destruction of copies. These are requests, not findings. No court has decided anything, and we make no prediction about liability, damages or settlement.

Have Dean, her label or the publishers responded?

Not in the coverage we reviewed: as of about 20:00 BST on Saturday 3 October 2026, no response from Dean, Capitol, Universal, Sony or Kobalt had been reported. Reports say requests for comment went to Dean and Universal, that Universal, Sony and Dean did not immediately reply and, in one report, that a Kobalt representative declined to comment. The public docket copy we could see showed no answer or motion. Silence at this early stage is neither an admission nor a denial.

What happens next in the case?

No hearing date or ruling had been reported as of that time, and the next formal step is the defendants’ response. Under US federal rules the time to respond runs from service of the complaint, or from a request to waive service, not from filing, and parties can agree extensions, so no date follows automatically from 1 October. We make no prediction about how the case will go, and we will update this page in place if a statement or filing appears.

What should readers take from the story so far?

So far this is a set of allegations in a newly filed civil case. A publisher has made claims in court, the defendants are companies rather than Dean, and no court has tested those claims.