A federal appeals court has reinstated a copyright infringement case against singers Justin Bieber and Usher filed by a composer over Mr. Bieber’s hit song, “Somebody to Love.”

Devin Copeland, an R&B singer and songwriter and his songwriting partner, Mareio Overton, had recorded the song for his upcoming album My Story II, and registered a copyright on it in 2008, according to the Thursday’s ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia in Devin Copeland, a/k/a/ De Rico; Mareio Overton v. Justin Bieber; Usher Raymond, IV, aka Usher et al.

A company that recruits artists for record labels sent copies of the album to Usher Raymond IV, who performs under the name Usher. The song was subsequently recorded by Usher, Mr. Bieber, and in a remix version with lead vocals by both Usher and Mr. Bieber. Mr. Bieber’s version was a hit, peaking at No. 15 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 chart, according to the ruling.

Mr. Copeland filed suit for copyright infringement against Mr. Bieber, Usher and other associated defendants in U.S. District Court in Norfolk, Virginia. The court dismissed the case, holding that a reasonable jury could not find substantial similarity between Mr. Copeland’s and the Bieber and Usher versions, according to the ruling.

But a three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit disagreed. There are dissimilarities between the two versions, including that Mr. Copeland’s version was written in the R&B subgenre while the other three “fall under the same broad umbrella of popular music,” the ruling said.

But there is a crucial similarity between the Copeland and the other versions’ chorus, said the appeals court. “It is the chorus — often termed the ‘hook,’ in recognition of its power to keep listeners coming back for more — that many listeners will recognize immediately on hearing in their minds when a song title is mentioned,” said the ruling.

“After listening to the Copeland song and the Bieber and Usher versions as wholes, we conclude that their choruses are similar enough and also significant enough that a reasonable jury could find the songs intrinsically similar,” said the appeals court in reinstating the lawsuit and remanding it for further proceedings.