Business
Page: 225
Taylor Swift continues to rewrite the rules, coming in at No. 1 on Billboard’s Power 100 list. Not only is this the first time that she’s topped the list, but it’s the just the second time any artist has crowned Billboard’s annual ranking of the most impactful music industry executives and power players (Jay-Z and […]
A federal judge says prosecutors cannot cite rap lyrics written by Jam Master Jay’s alleged killer during his murder trial, warning that “music artists should be free to create without fear that their lyrics could be unfairly used against them.”
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In a decision issued Tuesday, Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall ruled that the lyrics prosecutors wanted to use against Karl Jordan Jr. – one about shooting a man in the head, another alluding to drugs – were not directly connected to the Run DMC star’s 2002 murder, so they couldn’t be presented to the jury.
The ruling came amid a broader debate over the use of rap lyrics in criminal trials, a controversial practice that has drawn backlash from the music industry and efforts by lawmakers to stop it. A gang trial in Atlanta, in which prosecutors are using Young Thug’s lyrics against him, has drawn particular scrutiny.
In that case, the judge allowed the lyrics to be used, as have most judges confronted with the issue. But on Tuesday, Judge Hall not only barred them from being cited in Jordan’s case, but offered a detailed analysis of the practice and the risks that come with it.
“Courts should be wary of overly permissive rules allowing the use of rap lyrics and videos against criminal defendants at trial,” the judge wrote. “Music artists should be free to create without fear that their lyrics could be unfairly used against them at a trial.”
In a remarkable 14-page opinion, the judge offered a sweeping historical overview of hip hop’s past. She took readers from the genesis of hip hop in the Bronx to the present day, name-dropping Grand Master Flash, Public Enemy, Queen Latifah, Dr. Dre, Notorious B.I.G., Jay-Z, Nas, Future and Ice Spice along the way.
Because rappers have “played the part of storytellers, providing a lens into their lives and those in their communities,” the judge wrote, their music has often depicted “criminal conduct” and other real-life issues – something that has attracted scrutiny “not only from the public, but also from law enforcement.”
“As a result, the admissibility of rap lyrics has become the subject of dispute in courtrooms across the country,” Judge Hall wrote.
In Jordan’s case, prosecutors wanted to play a lyric in which he rapped “We aim for the head, no body shots, and we stick around just to see the body drop.” Since Jay was shot in the head, the government argued that the lyric “speaks directly to the issues in the case.”
But Judge Hall disagreed. Citing lyrics by Nas (“two in the dome, he’s laid down”) and Ice Cube (“two shots hit him in the face when they blasted”), the judge ruled that lines Jordan wrote “merely contain generic references to violence that can be found in many rap songs.”
She applied the same analysis to another lyric cited by prosecutors, in which Jordan rapped about “breaking down bricks” – an line that the government argued was an allusion to the drug charges he’s also facing. But again, Judge Hall cited other songs in which rappers say the same thing, like Migos’ 2021 track “Modern Day.”
“The members of Migos, however, do not stand accused of drug trafficking in this or any other case,” the judge wrote. “Jordan’s lyrics are simply too imprecise.”
The big problem, the judge wrote, is that rappers not only have a right to tell stories about violence and crime, but are also “increasingly incentivized to create music about drugs and violence to gain commercial success.” She warned that many “will exaggerate or fabricate the contents of their music in pursuit of that success.”
In all cases involving lyrics, Judge Hall said the core question should be whether the music has a “nexus to the criminal conduct” – meaning, a direct, literal connection to alleged crime. If prosecutors can’t show that, then lyrics should be avoided.
“Juries should not be placed in the unenviable position of divining a defendant’s guilt, in whole or in part, from a musical exposition with only a tenuous relationship to the criminal conduct alleged,” the judge wrote.
Judge Hall was careful to say that she was not banning all lyrics from cases. As a hypothetical, she referenced Kendrick Lamar’s 2012 track “The Art of Peer Pressure,” in which he raps about ripping off a house while “The sun is goin’ down” and “somebody in this room.”
“If the government wished to admit these lyrics into evidence at a subsequent trial accusing Lamar of burglarizing an occupied residence with his friends at sunset, there would be a more than sufficient basis to do so,” the judge wrote. “Individuals who choose to confess unmistakable details of their crimes should be held to those statements, to be sure.”
But Judge Hall said that was not the case with Jordan’s lyrics – nor with huge numbers of other rap songs that feature references to dark subjects.
“Themes of violence and criminality have become so prevalent within the genre that they have little, if any, probative value at trial,” the judge wrote. “It is critical that resolution of guilt and innocence emerge from evidence with a close relationship to a specific criminal act, and not be based on perceptions born from the commercial and artistic promotion of a criminal lifestyle.”
The trial over Jam Master Jay’s 2002 killing, in which Jordan and Ronald Washington stand accused of murdering the Run DMC star as payback for a failed drug deal, kicked off Monday. The proceedings are expected to run for several more weeks.
Read the entire decision here:
More than three decades into their career, the Wiggles continue to evolve and make history with No. 1 records, awards, arenas shows and more. Now, the beloved kids entertainers set another new mark, with the appointment of Luke O’Neill to the newly-created position of chief executive officer.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The incoming CEO will be expected to lead the organization’s digital transformation and global expansion.
Among his tasks, O’Neill will be expected to expand the Wiggles’ digital footprint, develop new products, grow the commercial operations of the business, and build greater distribution channels to reach larger audiences.
“The Wiggles have always been pioneers in delivering high-quality, educational, and entertaining content for children,” O’Neill comments. “I am thrilled to lead the team as we explore new opportunities in the digital and commercial spaces and expand our global presence. Together, we will continue to create memorable experiences for children and families around the world.”
The incoming chief carries experience in accelerating growth and leading digital transformations for businesses in real estate, hospitality, and events industries, and has served as a consultant with the Wiggles since mid-2023.
O’Neill has already played “a crucial role in shaping the strategic direction for the brand’s future,” reads a statement announcing his appointment, by “leading the development of a new digital strategy, while refocusing efforts in consumer product licensing and sponsorship opportunities.”
The Wiggles and their big red car aren’t slowing down. The group celebrated its 30th anniversary in 2021, then found a new gear. Along the way, the group won triple j’s Hottest 100 countdown for the first time (with a cover of Tame Impala’s “Elephant”); landed a No. 1 album on the ARIA Chart (also a first), became the first band in Australian history to perform two national arena tours in a single year; and scooped the Ted Albert Award for outstanding service to Australian music (a first for a kid’s entertainment act). Last year, the Wiggles teamed up with the Pinkfong Company for a four-part Baby Shark collaborative series.
Since 1991, the Wiggles have sold over 30 million albums and DVDs and 8 million books globally.
In Warner Music Group‘s sprawling 2023 ESG report, released Tuesday (Jan. 30), the label outlined plans and goals for its workforce, artists and environmental impact.
“We are determined to transform our business and spur industry change to mitigate the effects of the climate crisis,” the report states in an expansive section on sustainability practices. “This includes measuring and understanding WMG’s environmental footprint, setting science-based targets to reduce emissions…and leveraging our scale, experience and partnerships to foster cross-industry cooperation to minimize the environmental impacts of making and distributing music.”
For the company, these changes start with the company’s brick-and-mortar spaces, with the goal that “WMG will source 100% renewable energy for our operations” by 2030.
The plan is to first implement this initiative in WMG’s global offices and workspaces before rolling it out to WMG-owned and operated facilities. The company also plans to decarbonize its workplaces through 100% renewable energy-based power by 2030.
The report cites WMG joining with Sony Music Entertainment and Universal Music Group in 2023 to establish the Music Industry Climate Collective. The first initiative of this working group has been supporting the development and implementation of sector-specific guidelines for calculating Scope 3 GHG emissions within the recorded music industry. “Scope 3” refers to indirect emissions that occur in the value chain, such as those from product manufacturing, distribution and licensing.
The company also noted a previously announced partnership with MIT, Live Nation, Coldplay and Hope Solutions to understand and mitigate the environmental impact of the live events.
The company cites a goal of increasing public transportation utilization by 20% at Warner Music live events. This effort has already resulted in a partnership between Warner Music Finland Live and Helsinki City Public Transportation, which has provided fans with free public transportation included in their concert tickets.
With its environmental impact data independently reviewed and assured by a third-party auditor for the first time in 2023, WMG reports that in the past year, it has made “significant strides” in its Scope 1 and 2 data collection, analysis and methodology. (Scope 1 and 2 refers to emissions that are owned or controlled by the company and indirect emissions that result from activities of the company.)
“Despite our return to office,” the report says, its efforts “have led to an overall decrease in our reported Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions for 2023.”
The report also cites successful employee-driven initiatives, including its U.K. Wrights Lane office eliminating single-use plastic and switching to reusable cutlery and serveware. The WMG office in France has eliminated paper cups and improved waste management to increase recycling.
Regarding sustainable products and merchandise, the company outlines “an industry-first method” of creating vinyl albums using PVC alternatives. Says the report: “We are delivering these changes in partnership with our artists and songwriters, many of whom are increasingly looking for ways to share music with their fans in a sustainable way.”
Read the full report here.
Universal Music Group (UMG) says it will pull its entire music catalog from TikTok when its contract with the service expires on Wednesday (Jan. 31), accusing the platform of “trying to build a music-based business, without paying fair value for the music,” according to an open letter released Tuesday (Jan. 30).
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In the letter, addressed to UMG artists and songwriters, the company states that it’s particularly concerned about the rates that TikTok is offering to pay for its catalog. Other points of contention include the amount of content on TikTok that infringes its artists’ and songwriters’ works without providing “meaningful solutions” to help them combat it, the level of hate and harassment on the platform and TikTok’s stances on artificial intelligence (AI).
According to UMG, during the negotiations, the ByteDance-owned social giant “demanded a contractual right which would allow [AI] content to massively dilute the royalty pool for human artists,” which UMG states is “nothing short of sponsoring artist replacement by AI.”
If UMG pulls its catalog, it would affect all music distributed and administered by its recorded-music division as well as Universal Music Publishing Group.
The last deal UMG struck with TikTok to license both its recorded music and publishing was announced on Feb. 8, 2021. In July, WMG inked a multi-year licensing deal with TikTok that allows the company to use WMG’s music on its app as well as CapCut and its new “social streaming platform” TikTok Music, which is currently available in Brazil, Indonesia, Australia, Singapore, and Mexico. At the time the deal was announced, WMG CEO/chairman Robert Kyncl and TikTok’s chief executive Shou Chew said the agreement would benefit artists.
This is not the first time the music business has had issues with TikTok. In 2019, when the platform was just getting started, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) called on Congress to investigate TikTok for potential copyright theft. It was also reported around that time that TikTok was operating on expired deal extensions that were grandfathered in from when it acquired Musical.ly in late 2017. In March 2020, Billboard reported that all three majors had struck short-term licensing deals with TikTok.
Read the full open letter below.
Our core mission is simple: to help our artists and songwriters attain their greatest creative and commercial potential. To achieve these goals, our teams employ their expertise and passion to strike deals with partners all around the world, partners who take seriously their responsibilities to fairly compensate our artists and songwriters and treat the user experience with respect
One of those partners is TikTok, an increasingly influential platform with powerful technology and a massive worldwide user base. As with many other platforms with whom we partner, TikTok’s success as one of the world’s largest social platforms has been built in large part on the music created by our artists and songwriters. Its senior executives proudly state publicly that “music is at the heart of the TikTok experience” and our analysis confirms that the majority of content on TikTok contains music, more than any other major social platform.
The terms of our relationship with TikTok are set by contract, which expires January 31, 2024. In our contract renewal discussions, we have been pressing them on three critical issues—appropriate compensation for our artists and songwriters, protecting human artists from the harmful effects of AI, and online safety for TikTok’s users.
We have been working to address these and related issues with our other platform partners. For example, our Artist-Centric initiative is designed to update streaming’s remuneration model and better reward artists for the value they deliver to platforms. In the months since its inception, we’re proud that this initiative has been received so positively and taken up by a range of partners, including the largest music platform in the world. We’ve also moved aggressively to embrace the promise of AI while fighting to ensure artists’ rights and interests are protected now and far into the future. In addition, we’ve engaged a number of our platform partners to try to drive positive change for their users and by extension, our artists, by addressing online safety issues, and we are recognized as the industry leader in focusing on music’s broader impact on health and wellness.
With respect to the issue of artist and songwriter compensation, TikTok proposed paying our artists and songwriters at a rate that is a fraction of the rate that similarly situated major social platforms pay. Today, as an indication of how little TikTok compensates artists and songwriters, despite its massive and growing user base, rapidly rising advertising revenue and increasing reliance on music-based content, TikTok accounts for only about 1% of our total revenue.
Ultimately TikTok is trying to build a music-based business, without paying fair value for the music.
On AI, TikTok is allowing the platform to be flooded with AI-generated recordings—as well as developing tools to enable, promote and encourage AI music creation on the platform itself – and then demanding a contractual right which would allow this content to massively dilute the royalty pool for human artists, in a move that is nothing short of sponsoring artist replacement by AI.
Further, TikTok makes little effort to deal with the vast amounts of content on its platform that infringe our artists’ music and it has offered no meaningful solutions to the rising tide of content adjacency issues, let alone the tidal wave of hate speech, bigotry, bullying and harassment on the platform. The only means available to seek the removal of infringing or problematic content (such as pornographic deepfakes of artists) is through the monumentally cumbersome and inefficient process which equates to the digital equivalent of “Whack-a-Mole.”
But when we proposed that TikTok takes similar steps as our other platform partners to try to address these issues, it responded first with indifference, and then with intimidation.
As our negotiations continued, TikTok attempted to bully us into accepting a deal worth less than the previous deal, far less than fair market value and not reflective of their exponential growth. How did it try to intimidate us? By selectively removing the music of certain of our developing artists, while keeping on the platform our audience-driving global stars.
TikTok’s tactics are obvious: use its platform power to hurt vulnerable artists and try to intimidate us into conceding to a bad deal that undervalues music and shortchanges artists and songwriters as well as their fans.
We will never do that.
We will always fight for our artists and songwriters and stand up for the creative and commercial value of music.
We recognize the challenges that TikTok’s actions will cause, and do not underestimate what this will mean to our artists and their fans who, unfortunately, will be among those subjected to the near-term consequences of TikTok’s unwillingness to strike anything close to a market-rate deal and meaningfully address its obligations as a social platform. But we have an overriding responsibility to our artists to fight for a new agreement under which they are appropriately compensated for their work, on a platform that respects human creativity, in an environment that is safe for all, and effectively moderated.
We honor our responsibilities with the utmost seriousness. Intimidation and threats will never cause us to shirk those responsibilities.
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) welcomed the latest edition of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) Notorious Markets Report on Tuesday (Jan. 30), which provides an annual run-down of various forms of copyright infringement, including digital music piracy.
Digital music piracy is not front-of-mind for many listeners in the age of streaming; even the industry itself has focused more of its recent frustration on streaming fraud and the popularity of rain sounds, at least in public comments made in the last year.
However, global music piracy inched up in 2022, according to a March 2023 report from MUSO, a U.K. technology company, which tracked over 15 billion visits to music piracy sites that year.
The USTR’s new report highlighted a handful of sites — including 1337X, Krakenfiles, Rapidgator and Ssyoutube — where people go to stream or download songs illegally. “Ssyoutube is reportedly the most popular YouTube ripping site globally, with over 343 million visitors just in April 2023,” the USTR noted in one example.
“We appreciate the report’s prioritization of thefts that target the music community such as stream-ripping,” said George York, the RIAA’s senior vp of international policy, in a statement.
Overall, music is less of a concern in this year’s USTR report relative to 2023’s. The document’s primary focus is the “potential health and safety risks posed by counterfeit trademark goods.”
The USTR was heartened by the fact that “this year many e-commerce and social commerce platforms took solid steps toward initiating additional anti-counterfeiting practices and adapting to new circumvention techniques used by counterfeiters.”
“Several platforms filed public submissions outlining their implementation of new anti-counterfeiting tools, including releasing educational campaigns, increasing identity verification requirements, and implementing faster and more transparent notice-and-takedown processes,” the report continued. “Additionally, several platforms have invested in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning technologies as a way to scale up and quickly adapt traditional anti-counterfeiting measures such as text and image screening.”
The RIAA had asked the USTR to highlight another aspect of AI, according to comments submitted in October, though it was not ultimately included in the report.
At the time, the RIAA noted that “the year 2023 saw an eruption of unauthorized AI vocal clone services that infringe not only the rights of the artists whose voices are being cloned but also the rights of those that own the sound recordings in each underlying musical track. This has led to an explosion of unauthorized derivative works of our members’ sound recordings which harm sound recording artists and copyright owners.”
In a statement following the USTR’s latest release, York “urge[d] the organization to take “a close look in the future at emerging piracy challenges presented by AI, including the widespread illegal use of copyrighted sound recordings and artist names, images, and likenesses to generate invasive and unlawful voice clones and deepfakes.”
No Doubt and Sublime will each reunite at this year’s Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival for the first time in years, but there’s one massive reunion promoters couldn’t pull together: the Talking Heads.
Last September, festival curator and Goldenvoice president Paul Tollett traveled to the Toronto International Film Festival for a celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Talking Heads’ seminal concert film, Stop Making Sense. For the first time in over 30 years, David Byrne sat alongside his former bandmates Jerry Harrison, Chris Frantz and Tina Weymouth to discuss the film project in a live panel moderated by Spike Lee.
Tollett tells Billboard he had traveled to Toronto to potentially discuss having the Talking Heads perform at Coachella and met with members of the band and their representatives, but that he “sensed there were no shows happening, so I didn’t make an offer.”
Tollett emphasized that he never broached the subject of payment with the band and ultimately went home empty-handed. He would not discuss how much he was willing to pay for a reunion show at Coachella, though a source familiar with how much artists are paid to headline the mega-festival says the gig could have earned the group as much as $10 million.
Shortly after Tollett returned from his trip, a second offer came through, this time from Live Nation. The promoter told the Talking Heads it was willing to pay the band $80 million to headline six to eight festival gigs and headlining slots, sources close to the group say. The Talking Heads ultimately rejected that offer as well. Live Nation declined to comment when asked about the offer.
Ever since Jane’s Addiction agreed to reunite at Coachella in 2001, the Indio, Calif., music festival has become the go-to platform for reunion gigs, with acts like Siouxsie and the Banshees, the Pixies, Rage Against the Machine, The Specials and dozens more all finding a way to come back together for one more show in the desert. But as the event ages — it’s now in its 23rd year — and competition in the festival market intensifies, pulling these kinds of comeback concerts together has become increasingly difficult.
More than two months after the Toronto Film Festival, in early December, Tollett found himself at the center of a controversial dispute around Sublime’s reunion. Mike “Cheez” Brown, who managed the group Sublime with Rome, had learned that music manager Kevin Zinger with Regime Music Group had joined forces with Vandals bassist and musician-turned-executive Joe Escalante to stage an official Sublime reunion with original bassist Eric Wilson, original drummer Bud Gaugh and late singer Bradley’s Nowell’s son, Jakob Nowell, on vocals.
Brown also learned that Zinger and Escalante were targeting Coachella for the band’s first major reunion show and called Tollett to discuss. Just months earlier, Tollett had booked Sublime with Rome atop the Cali Vibes reggae festival, slated for this February in the band’s hometown of Long Beach, Calif.
While Tollett and many other festival talent buyers had heard about the effort to launch a Jacob Nowell-fronted reunion, at the time Brown called him, Tollett had not yet submitted any offers for the group, who had not yet performed live together. A test gig eventually came together weeks later as part of a charity event, and by late December, Sublime with Rome and the new Sublime had reached a settlement. Brown and Sublime with Rome agreed to end the band’s 13-year run after it played the festivals and dates they had already booked for 2024, while the newly re-formed Sublime would prepare for its first comeback gig as a band, scheduled for Apr. 13 at Coachella.
The No Doubt reunion, largely negotiated in late December and early January, would turn out to be easier and more straightforward than Sublime and the Talking Heads.
It was Tollett who initiated talks with Stefani’s manager, Irving Azoff, about the idea. The discussion with bandmates dragged out longer than expected as talks delved into band business outside of the reunion, but eventually, the group agreed to reunite in large part because of its long relationship with Goldenvoice, who promoted some of the band’s first shows. The $10 million payday would be significant for bandmates Adrian Young, Tony Kanal and Tom Dumont, whose current band, DREAMCAR, is led by AFI singer Davy Havoc and booked to play Goldenvoice’s Cruel World festival in May.
For her part, Stefani was already booked to play Cali Vibes in February when she agreed to play Coachella. A source close to Stefani tells Billboard not to expect a major No Doubt tour to follow the one-time reunion set, as she already has plans in place for the second half of the year to promote new solo music she plans to release this summer.
Big Machine Label Group has promoted two executives, with Mike Rittberg rising to COO and Clay Hunnicutt rising to executive vp of label operations. Both are already in their new roles and report to Big Machine Label Group president of label operations Andrew Kautz. Rittberg most recently served as Big Machine’s executive vp of label […]
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: A long-simmering feud between the families of Joey Ramone and Johnny Ramone has erupted into a new lawsuit over a proposed Netflix biopic; Madonna’s team vows to “vigorously” fight a lawsuit over her late concert starts; a man stalking Taylor Swift is arrested three times before he’s kept behind bars; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Hey, Ho, Let’s Go … To Court
Joey Ramone and Johnny Ramone — who were very much not actual brothers — didn’t like each other much in life. And guess what? Their heirs don’t like each other much either.
In a lawsuit filed last week in Manhattan court, Johnny’s widow, Linda Ramone, sued Joey’s brother, Mickey Leigh, over allegations that he had “covertly” developed a planned Netflix movie starring Pete Davidson as Joey. She says that any movie based on the pioneering punk band requires her sign-off.
“To permit defendants alone to tell the authoritative story of the Ramones would be an injustice to the band and its legacy,” Linda’s lawyers wrote.
The case is the latest in years of battles between Linda and Mickey, who split 50-50 ownership of the Ramones IP. And it raises interesting legal questions about so-called life rights deals — and how they raise unique challenges in the context of musical biopics.
To learn more, go read our full story, featuring the full backstory, legal analysis and access to the actual court docs.
Other top stories this week…
LATE DEBATE – Madonna’s management team and Live Nation responded to a high-profile lawsuit claiming the music legend harmed her fans by starting New York City concerts later than scheduled, disputing some allegations and saying they plan to “defend this case vigorously.”
TAYLOR’S STALKER HELD IN JAIL – David Crowe, the man charged with stalking Taylor Swift outside her Manhattan home, was ordered by a New York judge to remain in custody after he was arrested for a third time shortly after being released from jail the first time.
JAM MASTER JAY MURDER TRIAL – Two men accused of murdering Run-DMC‘s Jam Master Jay, Karl Jordan, Jr. and Ronald Washington, finally headed to trial this week, more than 21 years after the rap icon’s killing. Prosecutors say the two men killed Jay as payback after a failed cocaine deal; if convicted, they each face the possibility of life in prison.
JIMI HENDRIX ROYALTIES CASE – A London judge issued a ruling that the heirs of Jimi Hendrix’s former bandmates could continue to sue Sony Music over the rights to three classic albums, clearing the way for a trial next year to resolve the contentious lawsuit.
RIDESHARING … A GLOCK? – Chicago rapper Lil Zay Osama was indicted on two federal charges of illegal firearm possession after he allegedly left an automatic Glock pistol in the back of an Uber after a ride in New York City.
50 CENT SUED OVER MIC TOSS – The rapper was hit with a civil lawsuit over an incident last summer in which he was captured on video throwing a microphone at a concert, filed by a Los Angeles radio host who says she was struck by the mic and suffered “severe and permanent injuries.”
FUGEE LAWYER LEAKS – David Kenner, the attorney who unsuccessfully represented Fugees rapper Pras Michel in his criminal trial case year, pleaded guilty to a criminal contempt charge over allegations that he leaked grand jury materials to reporters ahead of the trial. The lawyer was sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation and will have to pay a fine.
KAT VON D CLEARED – A jury found that celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D did not violate a photographer’s copyrights when she used his portrait of Miles Davis as the basis for a tattoo she put on the arm of a friend, capping off a closely-watched case against the LA Ink star.
A judge on Monday rejected Cher’s request that her adult son be put into a court conservatorship controlling his money.
The Oscar- and Grammy-winning singer and actor had argued in a petition that 47-year-old Elijah Blue Allman’s large payments from the trust of his late father, rocker Gregg Allman, are putting him in danger because of his struggles with mental health and substance abuse.
But Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jessica A. Uzcategui was not convinced that a conservatorship was urgently needed and declined the petition, though she will still consider a larger, long-term conservatorship at a hearing in March.
Cher observed the hearing remotely. She appeared on a large screen in the courtroom throughout, but did not take part in the arguments.
Allman was in the courtroom with his his attorneys, who acknowledged his previous struggles but argued that he is in a good place now, attending meetings, getting treatment and reconciling with his previously estranged wife.
“We are thrilled that the court saw that he does not need a temporary conservatorship,” Allman’s lawyer said as he stood alongside him outside the courthouse. “He’s got a lot of support, he’s doing great.”
Cher’s attorneys argued that the support Allman was getting was from people who tell him what he wants to hear and downplay the size of his problems. They said his current apparent sobriety and mental health were illusory. They said he suffers from bipolar disorder, has been recently homeless, and that having large amounts of money might lead to access to drugs that could endanger his life.
Blue and his attorneys have consistently argued since the petition was first filed in December that none of this is true.
Uzcategui had already signaled at a hearing on January 5 that she wasn’t inclined to establish a conservatorship, delaying the decision until Monday because documents had not been shared in time with Allman’s attorneys.
Cher’s attorneys said that she was not necessarily seeking any direct control over Allman’s money, and would be happy to have a court-appointed fiduciary manage his finances. They did not immediately reply to a request for comment on the judge’s decision.
Court conservatorships, known as guardianships in some states, have come under far greater scrutiny in recent years after a temporary conservatorship imposed on Britney Spears in 2008 would end up leaving her without control of her money and major life affairs for nearly 14 years.