Remember the opening scene of Deadpool & Wolverine, where a crimson-suited figure carves a bloody path through faceless adversaries, all while perfectly synchronized to the iconic opening beats of NSYNC’s ‘Bye Bye Bye’? That instantly recognizable choreography, a cultural touchstone of the late 90s, is now at the center of a significant legal battle. Choreographer Darrin Henson has filed a lawsuit against Sony Music Holdings, alleging the company had no authority to license the dance he created to major entertainment properties like Marvel and, subsequently, Epic Games for use as an emote in Fortnite. This case thrusts the complex, often murky world of intellectual property rights for choreography into the spotlight, questioning who truly owns a dance move seen by millions.
The Core of the Lawsuit: Unauthorized Licensing
According to court documents filed on March 27 and reported by Billboard, Darrin Henson’s lawsuit makes a direct and clear claim: Sony Music Holdings did not have the legal permission to license his copyrighted choreographic work to third parties. The suit states, The reality is that the work belongs to Henson, and to obtain full acknowledgment of his ownership and a complete transfer of all monies earned by SME and its licensees, the plaintiff must seek declaratory relief from the court.
The contention is not that Sony used the dance for NSYNC’s original performances and music video—a context for which Henson was famously hired and later won the 2000 MTV Video Music Award for Best Choreography—but that its later licensing to entirely separate corporate entities, Marvel (Disney) and Epic Games, constituted an infringement of his rights.
From the Radio Music Awards to Blockbuster Films
Henson’s choreography for ‘Bye Bye Bye’ was first unveiled to the public at the 1999 Radio Music Awards, cementing its status as a defining element of NSYNC’s visual identity. For decades, the dance was intrinsically linked to the band. However, the modern media landscape, where intellectual property is a highly monetizable asset, changed the equation. The lawsuit traces the dance’s journey from that award show stage into the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s Deadpool & Wolverine trailer and film, a use that introduced it to a new generation. This transition, Henson argues, was made without his consent and without proper compensation for the new value generated.
Fortnite’s Role and the Emote’s Status
Although Epic Games is not named as a defendant in the initial filing, the lawsuit explicitly mentions that Sony was not authorized to license the dance to Fortnite. The ‘Bye Bye Bye’ dance was added to the game as an emote in September 2024, available for a fleeting four-day window in the Item Shop. This short availability, coupled with the new legal developments, makes it highly unlikely the emote will ever return to the game’s rotation. For Epic Games, this is another complication in a challenging period, following company-wide layoffs, price increases for V-Bucks, and previous controversies over licensed emotes, such as the altered and later restored Peacemaker dance.
A Precedent in Digital Entertainment Licensing
This case is not happening in a vacuum. It follows a series of high-profile legal disputes and public debates over the ownership of dance moves and their digital likenesses, from lawsuits over viral dances like the “Carlton” to Epic’s own cautious alterations of other licensed content. The Henson lawsuit directly challenges the standard practice of music labels licensing a bundle of rights—potentially including visual performances from music videos—to film studios and game developers. It asks the courts to delineate where the label’s rights to the song end and the choreographer’s rights to the specific movement composition begin.
The Broader Implications for Choreographers and the Industry
The outcome of Darrin Henson’s lawsuit could have far-reaching consequences for the entertainment industry. A ruling in his favor would strengthen the bargaining position of choreographers, who have historically struggled to retain control and receive residuals for the reuse of their work outside its original context. It would force studios, labels, and game developers to conduct more rigorous due diligence, ensuring they have licenses from all relevant copyright holders, not just the music publisher or record label. Conversely, a ruling favoring Sony could reinforce the current system where choreographic rights are often treated as a subsidiary part of a master recording or video license.
Defining Ownership in a Collaborative Art Form
A central complexity lies in the collaborative nature of pop music productions. While Henson was the hired choreographer, the performance was executed by NSYNC, filmed by a director, and owned by a record label. The lawsuit seeks to clarify that his creative contribution exists as a separate, protectable work. This distinction is crucial. If the dance is seen merely as a scene à faire
—an element so standard to a boy band performance that it isn’t copyrightable—Henson’s claim weakens. His legal team will likely argue that the specific, unique sequence of movements he created is sufficiently original to merit its own copyright protection, independent of the song.
The Legal Path Forward and Potential Outcomes
The lawsuit is seeking declaratory relief, essentially a judicial decree that Henson is the copyright owner, and an accounting and transfer of all monies Sony earned from licensing the dance. The legal process will involve dissecting the original contracts between Henson and Sony (or its subsidiaries) from the late 1990s, interpreting copyright law as it applies to choreography, and possibly setting a new precedent. Settlement out of court remains a strong possibility, as it often is in such industry disputes, which could lead to a confidential financial agreement and a new licensing framework for the dance’s future use.
Impact on Future Collaborations and Creativity
Beyond the immediate parties, this case sends a signal to creatives everywhere. For choreographers, it highlights the critical importance of negotiating for and retaining licensing rights in their contracts. For production companies, it underscores the need to clear all potential rights, a process that may now need to extend to choreography clearances for projects that feature iconic dances. While this could add a layer of complexity and cost to productions, it also promises a more equitable system where all creators are recognized and compensated for the ongoing commercial life of their work.
The sight of Deadpool slicing through enemies to the rhythm of ‘Bye Bye Bye’ was a moment of pure, meta-textual joy for audiences, perfectly blending nostalgia with contemporary blockbuster flair. Yet, behind that moment lies a tangled web of artistic creation, corporate licensing, and intellectual property law. Darrin Henson’s lawsuit against Sony is more than a dispute over a single dance; it is a pivotal challenge to the industry’s standard practices, seeking to establish that the architect of a cultural moment deserves a definitive say—and a share—in its perpetual commercial afterlife. As the case unfolds, it will test the legal boundaries of ownership in the digital age, where a dance created for a stage can be reborn endlessly on screens around the world.
