Britney Spears won a decisive court victory when a federal judge in Philadelphia tossed out a copyright infringement suit brought by two Pennsylvania men who claimed that the melody of Spears’ song “What U See Is What U Get” infringed their song entitled “What You See Is What You Get.”
 Judge found that the plaintiffs could not prove one of the essential elements of their case - that the defendants had access to their song.  The undisputed evidence showed that Spears recorded her version before the Plaintiffs ever gave their song to an agent to be pitched to Spears. But even if the copyright infringement were not chronologically impossible, the Judge found that the case would still fail because the two songs are not substantially similar.  Spears and her co-defendants, Zomba Recording Corp., Jive Records, Wright Entertainment Group and BMG Music Publishing Inc. were all entitled to summary judgment. The Plaintiffs claimed that they were contacted in 1995 by William Kahn, a talent scout who represented Spears, who invited them to submit songs for her upcoming album. The plaintiffs claim they began writing “What You See Is What You Get” in 1998 and gave Kahn an instrumental copy by October 1999. By November 1999, the suit said, the final version of the song was submitted to the U.S. Copyright Office. But the four men credited as writers of Spears’ song “What U See Is What U Get” were Jorgen Elofsson, David Kreuger, Per Magnusson, and Rami Yacoub. They testified that their work on the song’s melody was completed by October 1999.
All four also testified that they had not heard the plaintiffs’ song before March 2003 and did not copy it to create their song. Defense lawyers argued that the case failed because the plaintiffs couldn’t even prove the possibility that the defendants had access to their song. The judge stated that even if the Plaintiffs could show access, summary judgment would still be warranted since the plaintiffs couldn’t show that the two works are “substantially similar.”