Miley Cyrus wants a judge to dismiss a long-running lawsuit claiming her chart-topping “Flowers” ripped off Bruno Mars’ “When I Was Your Man,” arguing nobody should be allowed to monopolize “commonplace tropes in breakup songs.”

Nearly two years after the case was first filed against Cyrus, her attorneys say in a Monday court filing that it’s now time to finally end the high-profile legal battle — arguing that her hit song is “very different” from the earlier track and clearly does not constitute copyright infringement.

“Man, a slow piano ballad, is a breakup song from the perspective of a man who regrets not doing various things he believes could have saved his relationship,” writes Miley’s attorney Peter Anderson in a motion obtained and first reported by Billboard. “On the other hand, Flowers, an upbeat, danceable pop song, is a breakup song from the perspective of a woman rejoicing in her independence and self-reliance.”

Mars is not involved in the case against Cyrus; it was instead filed by Tempo Music Investments, a financial entity that bought the copyrights of “Man” co-writer Philip Lawrence.

In seeking to end Tempo’s case, Miley’s lawyers say the only actual similarities are the seemingly call-and-response lyrics of the two songs, such as his “I should’ve bought you flowers” and her “I can buy myself flowers.” But her attorneys say those are just basic words you might hear in any song about a failed relationship, not evidence of infringement.

“No one owns these words, which are commonplace tropes in breakup songs,” Anderson writes.

“Flowers,” which spent eight weeks atop the Hot 100 after it was released in January 2023, was immediately seen by many fans as an “answer song” to “Man,” which itself had reached the top of the chart in 2012. According to internet sleuths, Cyrus had no gripe with Mars but instead with her ex-husband Liam Hemsworth, who had supposedly once dedicated “Man” to her.

Despite those links, legal experts told Billboard at the time that Cyrus was likely not violating copyrights simply by using similar lyrics to fire back at the earlier song. But Tempo sued in September 2024, claiming “Flowers” had lifted numerous elements beyond the clap-back lyrics, including “melodic and harmonic material,” “pitch ending pattern,” and “bass-line structure.”

In Monday’s motion, Cyrus’ lawyers flatly denied those allegations. They asked the judge to grant them summary judgment – meaning rejecting the case without requiring a jury trial — based on a lack of genuine similarities between the two songs.

Musically, they say the songs share no melodic overlap and only “random, unprotectable elements” elsewhere. As for the lyrics, they say the well-documented similarities have also been in other breakup songs, such as a 2011 track by Justin Bieber: “That Should Be Me is a breakup song that also refers to flowers, holding hands, taking an ex-lover places, and talking for hours,” her attorneys write.

Miley’s lawyers also make another notable argument: That “Flowers” is shielded by copyright’s fair use doctrine, which allows for the re-use of protected material in a way that criticizes or comments on the earlier work. Though they say Cyrus and the other co-writers continue to “strenuously deny” any connection to “When I Was Your Man,” they argue that such artistic intent is irrelevant.

“Fair use … instead considers whether a reasonable observer could interpret Flowers as commenting on Man,” her lawyers write. “Even plaintiff acknowledges that Flowers’ upbeat lyrics have been perceived as responding to Man’s despondent lyrics.”

Cyrus previously moved to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, arguing that Tempo lacked the legal standing to file it in the first place. But that motion was denied last year, allowing the case to move ahead to this week’s more substantive arguments over similarities.

An attorney for Tempo did not immediately return a request for comment. The company will file its own response to the motion next month.