# i'm in love with your body...#. and his 2017 song shape of you, co—written with his regular songwriting partners johnny mcdaid and steve mac, remains the most streamed song on spotify ever, with over three billion streams to date. but the song led to another lawsuit for sheeran. this time, the grime artist sami chokri claimed that sheeran had borrowed a refrain from chokri's song, 0h why, for shape of you. chokri demanded a songwriting credit, and the uk's official music licensing body barred sheeran and his co—writers from claiming millions of pounds in royalties until the dispute was settled. afterfour long years, sheeran and his team won their case, but it took its toll. what are your feelings now this case is over? i'm happy it's over. i'm happy we can move on and get back to writing songs. and, yeah, i'mjust... all of it makes me sad, all of it. johnny, personalstrain the last few years, fighting this through? yeah, an extraordinary strain. and i think it seems to be the case across the board and on all sides. this is really not a fun process and it's not why we got into this. it's not why we got into making music. so while there's relief, it's also going to need time to integrate what went on. you've got some sympathy for sami chokri in this too, that you've all been through this together. is that right? yeah, i think lawsuits are not fun for anyone involved and, yeah, i think across all sides, it was not a nice experience and i don't think that anyone would contest that. it just wasn't pleasant. and long years of having this hanging over you, is it something that impacts mental health, do you think? absolutely. undoubtedly. it was a four—year process that kind of compressed towards the end. so in the last year, it got really heavy and it was consuming and the cost to our mental health and creativity was really tangible. now, this thing, in a sense, came on in stages. there was an initial challenge, your royalties got frozen, and then you chose to go to court. why did you do that? why did you choose to to step forward with this? well, it's kind of you're not really given much option to. if someone freezes your royalty says either, like, we'll we can get a judgment or you can have a settlement and you know that you're in the right, then you can't settle. just out of principle, you can't settle. so there was no other choice. our royalties were frozen and we were given two options and we chose the option that was integral to us. and johnny, obviously, you've done collaborations of all kinds. you've got snow patrol, you're working across the industry. what do you think was at stake for you as a writer in bringing this case? well, one of the most important parts of the songwriting process for us is that there's a sacred space, one we can trust. and we need to be able to lean into that space and make music freely and honourably. but to do it in a way where we can express ourselves from the heart, without having to constantly check to match a system. and that doesn't mean that we aren't as diligent as we can be about making sure that if we reference or copy something, then it's cleared entirely. that's a really important tenet of what we do. but i think what was at stake for us really was this space. and it seemed that a lot of songwriters everywhere were with us, alongside us, because they often would send us messages and say, it feels like we're up there with you. well, exactly. so, you had that sense of a bigger principle being at stake but also, i mean, any lawyer will tell you, when you go to court, well, we might not win. there's jeopardy as well, isn't there? and i guess that was hanging over you at some points in this. you might have wondered, have we done the right thing or not? yeah. before we got into it, like, way before, when actually we decided to take it to court, we were all told, like, this isn'tjust you go to court, you say your bit, and, you know, it's like stuff will be out in the press. there will be all sorts of things said about you, all sorts of things brought up. they will go through all your messages, all your voice notes, everything, be prepared for this. and we felt that that was what we wanted to do to clear our name. and we did it. and as i said, it's not a pleasant experience but if i could go back, i would do exactly the same thing. to what extent do you think this is an intensifying problem because of the way music is now distributed, the way it's streamed, the way people listen to it, the numbers of songs that are being put out there in the public space? well, it's mathematically intensifying because of the numbers. you know, as ed said in his statement, there's millions and millions of songs being put into the world every year now and there are only so many notes. and if the idea that we can access something, therefore it's more than likely that we heard it persists, then it doesn't really speak to a fair way of how music gets to people. just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's likely. and i think that's a really important part of all of this. there are millions and millions and millions of combinations of notes out there. coincidences happen. so, the more numbers we have, the more coincidences will happen. so, in that way, it is intensifying. # i'm in love with the shape of you #. we push and pull like a magnet do...#. is this, in a sense, about the scale of what you do, the degree of success you've had? because one hears the phrase, no hit, no writ, in the record business. i mean, is it the case that people go after obscure songs? have you ever had something that's cropped up in that sort of regard? is it purely about saying, ok, this one is a monster hit, shape of you, and therefore it's much more likely to come under dispute? yeah, i would say that. and i would say that from very, very early on in my career, me and johnny had a song called photograph. # so you can keep me. # inside the pocket of your ripped jeans. # holding me closer...#. and there was a claim made on that. and we were basically advised to settle that, because i was on tour, lots of other things going on and it was basically, you haven't got time to do this and also there's a culture around this that you probably would lose. so we settled that. and i think from there, much like with the blurred lines case, the floodgates opened and they go, well, if you did that then, and i think that has added into this, basically. do you regret settling there or do you think that was then and this is now and...? personally, yes, personally, yes. and but not from a financial point of view, it's from a... like, i didn't play photograph for ages after that. ijust stopped playing it, i felt weird about it. it kind of made me feel dirty. and we've now got to a point where we actually got all of the song again and we've managed to get all of our bits back and again, not from a financial point of view, just to feel like it was our song again. so, yeah, i'd say you probably agree with that as well, right? yeah. i think at the time, we took the best advice we could get and it was new. we'd never been in that situation before and we were kind of bamboozled by the culture and what was going on. so we had to make a decision on it and we made a choice at the time that we can't change. but yes, i certainly feel some regret around it. and also, if you read the judgment, he sort of agreed with our point... anyway, read it. let's go on now to how you make music and the creative process and the degree to which this does or doesn't influence it, because you're very open about certain influences. no scrubs, for example, in the case of that song, you talk about it... me and johnny, we have countless songs that we've done, like... on my second one, johnny started working on my second album, but there was a tune called nina, where we sampled a wretch 32 song and instantly got that cleared. we sampled remembering jenny from buffy the vampire slayer and got that cleared. and on my song don't, there was a raphael saadiq we cleared with the lucy pearl song. i'm sorry, i'm trying to think now, but basically any time i've gone, oh, yeah, no, that obviously i've taken influence from that, we go and clear it because why would you want to go to court? why on earth would you try and hide it? it's way better to just go in with a clean heart and... and for people who don't understand the music business, along with that acknowledgement comes some sharing of the money, doesn't it? is that the way it works, that you divide up the proceeds if it is a big hit or...? yeah, i don't know that we necessarily think about it monetarily, but there's certainly a credit and a percentage... which is also... i'm not saying here like that there's 22 million songs released every single year, so therefore plagiarism is fine and it should happen. it's like, if you've had influence from something, you credit it and if you haven't, you say that you haven't. and that should be it, it should just be about honesty. it's some of these things, though, can be characterised in a positive way, can't they? like, someone�*s open to influence or they love collaborating. and then you can characterise it in another way. for example, you're a magpie, that that was a line that was used in court by the other side, that that you pick things out of other people's music. well, i mean, in a sense, you could be describing the same thing, couldn't you? it's a positive or a negative construction on the fact that you're very open to collaboration with other artists and acknowledging it. but being open to collaboration with other artists and sampling and taking influence and crediting is very different to holding onto an idea for years and years and years and being like, well, i'm going to steal that and use it. it's a very, very different thing. and i think, you know, i write and johnny writes hundreds of songs for myself, for other artists, for things that are used in advertising campaigns. i just write songs all the time and, you know, sometimes things slip through the cracks, like, we are human. but i would say, largely, we just do whatever feels right, you know? and obviously, thejudge in finding in your favour said there was no conscious or unconscious influence on your work. but how are you going to assure that in the future? i mean, is it going to be you've got to record your sessions when you're making music? i do that. since... what's mad, and this is actually... so, i started doing it from photograph, started filming every single session for my stuff... so, i would film every single session... as a record? ..for my album. yeah. because i'd be like, i don't want to have this situation happen again. thing is, with shape of you is i'd gone in to write for other artists. so i said to nick, who films all my sessions — it was actually actually my cousin murray back then — i just said, don't worry about coming in today, i'm going to go and write for little mix or whoever, so don't worry about bringing the camera in. so now ijust film everything. everything's on film and we've had sort of claims come through on songs and we go, well, here's the footage and you watch and you'll see that there's nothing there. but, johnny, where does this end? because if i'm bringing a case, do i subpoena your streaming records, everything you've listened to for the last five yea rs. i mean, how does that work? that would be, i would imagine, impossible, you know, because whatever limitation you have, if somebody wants to get at you, then they'll say the gap in that limitation is the problem. so, if you don't get up in the morning and live like you're on the truman show, then there are going to be gaps in what you have. i think what we have to remember here is that we have a process and when we work together, that process is very hard to define. it's very hard to articulate what it looks like. when we show people the process, they begin to see a little bit around how creative it is, how kinetic it is, and dynamic, and it isn't that prescriptive. so when we get to show that, then people are able to have an insight into how unique creation might happen. yeah, you described it as like rocket science, only more complicated. yeah, well... that's going to follow you around forever. yeah, sometimes you say something and then, you know, time machine and all. # i'm in love with your body #. i'm in love with your body...#. but the making of that song, tell me if i'm wrong, but it was like an hour and a half, is that right? it was a relatively short period of one day. yeah. and i think a lot of what the case boiled down to with this is not people not believing that i could write a song in an hour and a half. but what i wanted to say is, like, i work every day at my craft, every day to be able to do a song in an hour and a half, and we write multiple songs. we actually bookended the case with two studio sessions with me, johnny and steve, where we just wrote as many songs as possible. in the first day, we did five and the last day we did three, and those are not uncommon days for us. it would actually be a weird day if we just wrote one. like, that would be an odd day. and i think, you know, you said you've worked at newsnight for 30 years and you can you contacted us about the interview yesterday and you were ready today for it. you know, that's because you are a journalist who has put in a lot of time into your craft. and i'm not going to say, well, i don't believe you, you must have known about this for months and months and months. i just believe that because you put time into your craft that obviously you're going to be good at it. and the song did take an hour and a half. i don't know what anyone else wants me to say on that. it did. lots of songs take an hour and a half, a team took half an hour, photograph probably took half an hour. bad habits probably took an hour. like, we do this every single day, therefore, we are quick at it. but i think this is one of the things about ed, and i've seen people surprised because he is extraordinarily prolific and he's fast. when ed gets into flow, it's happening in real time. so, he can nearly write a song as fast as he can perform a song. it's really something to behold. now, you've spoken about changing the way you work since the photograph case and recording things, so you have a kind of evidence base of what you were doing and what you were thinking about, what you were talking about when you were creating a song. at the same time, you don't want to inhibit that freedom, that free flow that sometimes takes shape very quickly. so, does this in any way change the way you work going forward, or are you just hopeful that you can push on through? filming, not so much, because it's my best friend that does it and he's basically part of the family, so he's just... yeah, i don't think that changes the writing, but in terms of, yeah, there's definitely... i mean, there's the george harrison quote where he says he's scared to touch the piano because he might be touching someone else�*s note. and there's definitely a feeling of that in the studio sometimes, if you... i personally think the best feeling in the world, the best feeling is the euphoria around the first idea of writing a great song, like, the first spark, where you go, oh, this is special, we can't spoil this, this is amazing. but that feeling has now turned into, oh, wait, let's stand back for a minute. have we touched anything? you find yourself in the moment second guessing yourself. how do you react now if someone basically lifts one of your melodies or one of your lyrics? i mean, would you go after them or...? the amount of times that it's happened and it's just... i don't want anything to do with it. just do you, do you. i don't care. and this is not in any way to say that it's ok to do that, but i certainly hear motifs and melody structures and lyrical ideas that i think, if not are born from something we've done, are influenced by it. it's flattering or it's, ifeel like i'm part of a culture. i'm part of something bigger. we're lucky, you know, we get to write songs every single day. that's what we do, that's our life. i wouldn't want to waste my life or time or energy chasing that down. and it's not an invitation to do it. but i guess some people will say, well, yeah, but you're a huge artist and therefore you can afford, in that sense... but it's never about... the conversation around all of this is always about money. it's not about money, it's not about money. this is just about heart and honesty... integrity. yeah. it's not about, like... win or lose, we had to go to court, you know, we had to stand up for what we thought was right. and it's not that we're standing against someone. we're standing up for what we believe is right. and there's a difference. and i think we feel really grateful that the system in this instance offered us a chance to be heard, and it offered the other side a chance to be heard, because we believe that that's necessary moving forward. everybody deserves to have a voice. everybody deserves to be heard in this. i think we were really lucky to have the judge we had in this case, who was exceptionally musical, probably the most musical person in the room. i mean, in terms of his technicality and his ability to navigate the nuance of this case. there were questions that he asked of the musicologists that were beyond my understanding, and yet he had a real grasp on it. and the fairness that it felt he brought into the room settled us through the process. do you think, in a sense, you can turn a page on this, or do you think there will be continued litigation around this question of the creative origin of hit songs? i think, for something to change, a lot of energy, time and conversation is going to have to be had, and that's been missing. we have to remember that we're really part of a community, a community of songwriters that doesn't stop at the end of our studio or our session. there are songwriters everywhere and this affects songwriters everywhere, this being whatever culture we have around litigation. and i think what would be a win out of this is to have more conversations, to have more discussions, and to put it on the table and to start talking about it between us, the people that write songs and, you know, maybe bring ideas to the business end of it and say, look, this is where we're struggling. this is what is inhibiting our creativity and our process, can we talk about it? i think talking about things is missing a lot in the world today and certainly for us, that would be a win. do you mean ways of trying to find a way through some of these things without it going to court, to arbitrate orto...? well, i think there's obvious holes in the system at the moment. if i can go to a musicologist and get a report and then take that report to a society, and then they freeze someone's income based on that, that's a problem. it's a problem because it creates — not in this case, specifically, just in the wider scheme of things — it creates a culture where it can be used as a threat. and i think that is where we have to be having conversations with societies, with managers, with artists, songwriters, and say, this isn't ok for anybody. # white lips # pale face breathing in snowflakes...#. do you essentially hope now to sort of enjoy the freedom to crack on with creating songs and making music and leave this behind? yeah, i mean, that's what we do. i mean, that's what we love doing. we love writing songs. every day in court was a day not being able to write songs. and we do write songs every day, i play shows as much as i can. you know, every day is a day that you can't do that. and so we're definitely happy to be back playing songs. and you've got a huge tour in prospect which will focus you now, won't it, for the coming months? yeah, i mean, it's nice to have something to have focus in and build towards, you know, a distraction to, you know... throughout the court case, in the evenings, i was going to rehearse and i was doing warm—up shows and it was nice to have something positive at the end of the day to remind us why we do it and get up on stage and play a song and feel like it's good, you know? thank you both very much. cool the start of the week bolt one of two showers. the the start of the week bolt one of two showers.— of two showers. the theme continues _ of two showers. the theme continues particularly - of two showers. the theme continues particularly for i continues particularly for england and wales. 30% of the average april rainfall so far for some areas. it looks as though it is going to be another dry april, a third in secession but not as dry as last april. we did have a few showers through the day on monday. figure cloud tracking westwards, chilly start to tuesday morning. after the sunny star, cloud beginning. more sunshine for northern ireland. southern and western areas holding on to the sunshine with high levels of uv and high levels of tree pollen for those who suffer. on the north sea coast, we will struggle with temperatures. where we hold on to the sunshine, about average for the time of year but it does feel distinctly cooler. through the evening and overnight, we continued to feed the cloud of the north sea coming and going but under the clear skies, temperatures will fall closer to freezing for a touch of grass frost. perhaps not quite as chilly on tuesday night into wednesday morning. wednesday, quite a bit of cloud in the sky. the windsor easing getting trapped under the high pressure. a bit of a breeze through the channel islands along the south coast without quite as much sunshine temperatures arejust quite as much sunshine temperatures are just coming down one degree or so. chilly north of scotland and particularly with the breeze of the north sea. on thursday, week by the front in the north of scotland. very little rain on the horizon. low pressure building however towards the west they may some splashes of rain towards the weekend. on thursday, we see the prolonged sunshine, we will see temperatures of 16— i7 sunshine, we will see temperatures of 16— 17 degrees in a shelter. very little sign of rain even well into next week. the bridge is dipping particularly anything either. only dry but getting colder as we start may. a bit of a fly in the eye meant in terms of low pressure approaching the west from the weekend which could provide some much—needed rain. you can see the jetstream pushes southwards for a time but a lot of uncertainty about how far is it will come and for the majority of the week ahead, the majority of the week ahead, the jetstream the majority of the week ahead, thejetstream remains the majority of the week ahead, the jetstream remains strong to the jetstream remains strong to the north—west, pushing low pressures into scandinavia. subtle changes. could see when the weather. the chance that the weather systems and low pressures will be close to northern and eastern areas to bring whether francine and a little bit of rain. on balance, namely dry —— weather fronts. possibly windier as well. still away with the end of april looking dry as well. as ever, there is more online. welcome to bbc news. i'm nancy kacungira. our top stories: the world's richest man, elon musk, buys twitter for $41; billion, but what does he plan to do with it? russia's foreign minister says there's a danger the war in ukraine could lead to a third world war, as many are forced to live underground, desperate for the war to end. translation: everybody is scared. now— translation: everybody is scared. now even _ translation: everybody is scared. now even afraid - translation: everybody is scared. now even afraid of. scared. now even afraid of silence. you never know what will happen next. a turkish court has sentenced civil rights activist osman kavala to life in prison without parole on charges of attempting to overthrow the government over