A company that owns a portion of the copyright to Bruno Mars’ “When I Was Your Man” points to overwhelming similarities between the two tracks.

Miley Cyrus sings "Flowers" during the Grammy Awards.

Miley Cyrus performs onstage during the 66th Grammy Awards. Kevin Winter/Getty Images

Miley Cyrus has been sued for allegedly ripping off Bruno Mars’ “When I Was Your Man” for her Grammy-winning hit song “Flowers.”

The lawsuit, filed in California federal court on Monday, was brought by Tempo Music Investments, which acquired in 2020 a share of the copyright to the Mars track from songwriter Philip Lawrence. It accuses Cyrus of “intentional copying” constituting infringement.

Songwriters Gregory Hein and Michael Pollock, who cowrote the song with Cyrus, Sony Music Publishing, and distributors of the song, including Apple, Live Nation and Amazon, were also named in the complaint, which doesn’t involve Mars on either side.

“Flowers,” written after Cyrus’ divorce with Liam Hemsworth, became an overnight hit when it debuted in January 2023 at the top of the Billboard Hot 100 chart, where it stayed for eight weeks. A year later, it earned Cyrus her first Grammy.

Similarities between the two tracks were immediately apparent. Cyrus’ song is regarded by many listeners as an interpolation of “When I Was Your Man,” which was released in 2013.

Tempo Music’s complaint alleges “Flowers” is an unauthorized derivative of Mars’ record. It points to substantial similarities in the melody, harmony and chorus.

“Indeed, the opening vocal line from the chorus of ‘Flowers’ begins and ends on the same chords as the opening vocal line in the verse of ‘When I was Your Man.’” states the complaint.

The lawsuit details overlaps in the melodic designs of the songs, which Tempo Music says share the same “musical fingerprint.” It also cites a side-by-side comparison of the lyrics. While Mars sings “That I should have brought you flowers and held your hand,” Cyrus sings “I can buy myself flowers and I can hold my own hand,” for instance.

“A comparison of the lyrics of the two songs also suggests that the musical similarities are no coincidence,” writes Alex Weingarten, a lawyer for the company, in the complaint.

In the case, Cyrus may argue that she’s protected by fair use, which provides protection for the use of copyrighted material to make a secondary work as long as it’s “transformative.”