Business
Page: 91
Ye (formerly Kanye West) is facing a new lawsuit over Vultures 1 from a group of Memphis rappers who claim the star and Ty Dolla $ign committed “brazen” copyright infringement by sampling a song after failing to secure a license.
The case – the latest in a long list of such lawsuits against Ye – claims the track “Fuk Sumn” is “riddled” with illegal samples from a 1994 song called “Drink a Yak (Part 2)” by the artists Criminal Manne (Vanda Watkins), DJ Squeeky (Hayward Ivy) and the late Kilo G (Robert L. Johnson Jr.)
Like several other previous cases against Ye, the lawsuit claims that the star’s reps reached out to clear the samples – but that he then just continued to use it without a license when talks broke down.
Trending on Billboard
“After numerous unsuccessful attempts at resolving this matter directly with the responsible parties, plaintiffs have been left with no other method of recourse than to bring this cause of action,” attorneys for the accusers write in a complaint filed Wednesday.
The use of the earlier song in “Fuk” is so “blatant” and “brazen” that the spots where samples were used in Ye’s track are “easily discernible,” the lawsuit claims. Near the start of Ye’s song, Criminal Manne can allegedly be heard rapping a lyric from “Yak” that stars with “smokin on a junt”; seconds later, Kilo G is allegedly heard rapping another line: “Stop off at the liquor store, get your yak, then we headed for the indo.”
The new lawsuit is one of more than a dozen such cases that have been filed against Ye over claims of unlicensed sampling or interpolating during his prolific career. The controversial rapper has faced nine such infringement cases since 2019 alone, including a high-profile battle with estate of Donna Summer that settled earlier this year.
Lawyers for the three accusers say that reps for Ye reached out to clear the sample in February, after “Fuk” had already been released. Those talks allegedly went on for months, but were terminated in June when the plaintiffs say they were were notified that “YE had fired his entire legal and business team leaving him without any legal representation.”
“Despite a much anticipated resolution resulting from several months of intense negotiations, Plaintiffs were informed they would need to wait to be contacted by Defendant YE’s new legal representation,” the lawsuit says.
Another Ye attorney then reached out to re-start the sample negotiations, the lawsuit says, but then were informed that he too was no longer working with Ye. The accusers say that no deal has been reached since.
“Plaintiffs have never given permission to Defendants for such use of their music,” attorneys for the three rappers write. “Meanwhile all Defendants have continued to profit from the illegal usage of the sampled [song] with over 150,000,000 Spotify streams to date.”
Reps for Ye and Ty Dolla did not immediately return a request for comment.
Former MNRK Music Group president/CEO Chris Taylor has officially opened the doors on his next venture, Hall of Fame Artists, which is currently managing artists with plans to expand into the recording, publishing and multimedia sectors.
Hall of Fame’s roster of approximately 30 acts includes much-sampled U.K. soul and funk legends Cymande, who are enjoying a resurgence in popularity, Canadian lo-fi rapper and streaming sensation, Powfu, who has 8.2 million monthly listeners on Spotify; jazz pianist and composer, Kiefer, electro pop star, Lights, and stand-up comic Brittany Brave.
Taylor, who resigned from Blackstone-owned MNRK this past summer and took its management division with him, technically opened Hall of Fame in July, but says he chose not to publicize it. Five months later, he told Billboard he has team members based in New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Vancouver and the United Kingdom. They include music and comedy industries veteran Keith Hagan, a longtime publicist and marketing strategist for acts like Kenny Rogers, Paul McCartney, TOTO and Paul Weller; touring and merchandise expert Sarah Osgoode (Tragically Hip, Arkells, Lights); radio promotion exec, Polo Brewster (Kendrick Lamar, J Cole, Tory Lanez); and marketing team members, Kultar “KC” Chohan and Kate Stronczer.
Trending on Billboard
“There has never been a better time to be an independent operator in the music industry,” Taylor says. “We are providing a full suite of services that clients can take full advantage of. Everybody is talking about how easy it is to do everything yourself, and I think there’s a lot of truth to that. But there are so many tools now to manage and having experience with those is vital, and I think it’s very difficult for artists to do it all on their own.”
Taylor compares navigating the music industry to negotiating tax regulations. You can master them, but they are changing all the time,” he says. ,n the music business you can master TikTok, Instagram, Spotify, Apple and all the other platforms out there, but they’re changing all the time. How does an artist stay on top of that? I don’t think they do without a team.
The company is in the process of signing their first artists to the recording and publishing divisions. Expect many more exciting updates from the company as the road to the hall of fame gets constructed.
While at MNRK, Taylor’s team worked with The Lumineers, Pitbull, Chromeo, Zakk Wylde and the estate of Chuck Berry. Originally branded Entertainment One (eOne), the company was acquired for a reported $4 billion, and in 2021, Taylor led the sale of the eOne/Hasbro Music division — which he ran, to Blackstone for a reported $385 million. Prior to his work with those companies, Prior to MNRK, he was the music attorney for Drake, Kaytranada, Avril Lavigne, Three Days Grace, Sum 41 and Nelly Furtado.
Taylor says Hall of Fame is in the process of signing its first two artists to its recorded music and publishing divisions. “For now we’re prepared to do this brick by brick,” he says. “Then we plan to scale up swiftly.”
LONDON — The British government is calling on the live music industry to introduce a voluntary levy on stadium and arena tickets sold in the United Kingdom “as soon as possible” to “safeguard the future of the grassroots music sector.”
“We believe this would be the quickest and most effective mechanism for a small portion of revenues from the biggest shows to be invested in a sustainable grassroots sector,” said the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in a report published Thursday (Nov. 14).
Earlier this year, a cross-party committee of MPs said a new levy on arena and stadium tickets was urgently needed to stem the tide of small grassroots music venue closures in the United Kingdom.
Trending on Billboard
According to the Music Venue Trust (MVT), the number of grassroots music venues (defined as limited capacity venues regularly staging live music) in the U.K. declined from 960 to 835 in 2023, a fall of 13%, representing a loss of as many as 30,000 shows and 4,000 jobs.
Responding to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s report on the grassroots live music sector, published in May, the government said Thursday that it was “deeply concerned” with the rate of venue closures and that “a small industry-led levy within the price of a ticket” would benefit the U.K.’s live music system “as a whole.”
The government said it wanted the voluntary levy to come into effect “as soon as possible” so that it could be applied to arena and stadium music shows taking place in 2025. How the funds raised will be used to support small and low-capacity music venues should be clearly explained to ticket buyers, said the government.
“We urge the live music industry, and in particular the biggest commercial players who will have the biggest impact on the success of an industry-led levy, to act and to do so swiftly,” said DCMS.
Exactly what form such a levy on arena and stadium shows will take is still to be determined. While there is broad support throughout the U.K. live music industry for a voluntary levy, some promoters would prefer that it is applied on a case-by-case basis and stakeholders are divided on whether the levy should be included within the ticket’s price or as an additional fee on top of the face value of the ticket.
The size of venue the levy would be applied to and its cost/rate is also yet to be decided, although the Music Venue Trust has previously called for a £1 levy ($1.26) to be applied to arena and stadium shows above 5,500 capacity, excluding festivals. Discussions are currently taking place between live executives around what charitable body should collect, manage and distribute proceeds from the fund.
In a statement, Jon Collins, chief executive of live music industry umbrella organization LIVE, said driving forward “an industry-led solution to the challenges currently being experienced by venues, artists, festivals and promoters remains our number one priority.”
The idea of a voluntary arena tickets levy to support the grassroots music sector is one that has already received support from several high-profile U.K. artists and organizations.
In September, Coldplay announced that it would be donating 10% of the band’s proceeds from their 2025 dates at London’s Wembley Stadium and Hull’s Craven Park stadium to the Music Venue Trust.
Other acts backing the initiative include rock band Enter Shikari, who donated £1 from every ticket sold on its February U.K. arena tour to the trust, and Sam Fender, who has pledged to do the same on his forthcoming U.K. dates. This year, Halifax-based venue The Piece Hall became the first U.K. venue to give ticket-buyers the option to donate to the charity.
A similar scheme to support grass roots music creation exists in France, where a statutory 3.5% levy on the gross value of all concert tickets sales goes into a central fund administered by the Centre National de la Musique (CNM), France’s public agency for the music industry.
“This is the beginning of a way forward,” Kwame Kwaten, director of artist management company Ferocious Talent, whose roster includes Blue Lab Beats, Hak Baker and Caitlyn Scarlett, tells Billboard.
“If [the levy] happens, it will at least begin the process of addressing something that has been left out to dry with humongous consequences, especially at the kind of levels that we have to operate at before an artist gets to the arena, stadium level, which is where 80-90% of [touring] artists are,” says Kwaten, who gave evidence to the CMS committee during the inquiry.
“We are standing at a massive crossroads,” he says, “and we have now got a chance to do something about it.”
In a statement, CMS Committee chair, Dame Caroline Dinenage, said she welcomed the government’s recognition that “swift action on a levy is needed from the bigger players who pack out arenas and stadiums,” but warned that “the lack of a firm deadline for movement risks allowing matters to drift.”
“Without healthy roots, the entire live music ecosystem suffers,” said Dinenage, who is calling for government ministers to set a clear deadline for the industry to act. If no significant progress is made within six months, she said the CMS committee will hold another hearing with representatives of the U.K. live music industry.
“Every week I hear from music managers trying to do the impossible and bridge catastrophic shortfalls in their artists touring budgets,” said Annabella Coldrick, chief executive of U.K. trade body the Music Managers Forum (MMF), in a statement. Coldrick says it is “imperative” that the music industry comes together to establish a ticket levy on “all large-scale live music shows” to support smaller scale touring artists. “The current situation is untenable,” she says.
The U.K. government’s support for an arena ticket levy is the latest in a long line of Parliament-led interventions into the music industry that have taken place in recent years, including a nine-month probe into the music streaming business and a subsequent review of the sector by the U.K. competition watchdog.
More recently, authorities have turned their attentions to the live industry. In September, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched an investigation into Ticketmaster over its much-criticized use of dynamic ticketing for Oasis‘ reunion tour, which prompted hundreds of complaints from fans and fierce condemnation from British politicians.
The British government has also said it would be looking into the practice of dynamic pricing for music concerts as part of its consultation into the secondary ticketing market, which is due to begin in the coming weeks.
Pioneering producer and singer Imogen Heap has partnered with Jen, an ethical AI music creation platform, to launch two new models inspired by her musical stylings. The partnership was announced Thursday (Nov. 14) at the Web Summit conference in Lisbon, Portugal.
First, Heap is launching her own StyleFilter model, Jen’s patented tool that allows users to create original tracks that infuse the distinct musical styles of of an artist or producer into their new works. Specifically for Heap’s collaboration, the StyleFilter model was trained on her new singles “What Have You Done To Me” and “Last Night of an Empire.” Importantly, StyleFilter is said to do this while still “maintaining transparency, protection and compensation” for Heap. Secondly, Heap and Jen have also announced a new AI voice model trained on Heap’s distinct vocals.
Jen co-founder and CEO, Shara Senderoff, and Heap took the stage at Web Summit’s Centre Stage to demonstrate how StyleFilter works, transforming prompts into compositions that weave Heap’s style into a user’s original works. Watch their explanation below:
Trending on Billboard
Over her decades-long career, Heap has been viewed as an innovator, pushing the boundaries of art and technology. Since the early days of her career, she has popularized the use of vocoders. Later, she developed her own products, like the Mi.Mu gloves, a wearable tool that allows her to record loops and edit vocals with small hand movements, and The Creative Passport, a service that combines all of an artist’s information in one place from a bio, press photos, royalty accounting, set lists and more.
Last month, in an interview with The Guardian, Heap explained her new AI assistant, called Mogen, which is trained on Heap’s interviews, speeches and TK to act as essentially a living autobiography that can answer questions for fans in her persona. Later, she hopes to expand Mogen to be trained on her musical improvisation and to become a live collaborator at gigs.
Imogen Heap and Shara Senderoff at Web Summit
Jen is an AI music making platform that puts transparency at the forefront. Its Jen-1 model, launched in June, is a text-to-music model trained on 40 different licensed catalogs (and then verified against 150 million songs). It is also backed by APG founder/CEO Mike Caren, who came on as a founding partner in fall 2023. As Senderoff explained in a August 2023 interview with Billboard, “Jen is spelled J-E-N because she’s designed to be your friend who goes into the studio with you. She’s a tool.”
Jen uses blockchain technology to ensure transparency and the ability to track its works after they are generated and put out in the world. Each of the works created with Heap’s StyleFilter will be authorized for use through Auracles — an upcoming non-profit platform, designed by Jen, that uses data provenance to give artists have more access, control and permission for what is made using their StyleFilter model.
While other AI companies have worked on creating personalized AI music models, trained on a specific producer or artists catalog before, like Soundful Collabs, the team at Jen believes StyleFilter is different because “it can learn and apply the style of an artist by training on a single song, establishing a new level of creative precision and efficiency,” says a spokesperson for the company.
“Shara’s integrity shines an outstanding light at this pivotal moment in our human story,” says Heap. “The exponential curve of innovation in and with AI attracts opportunists primarily focused on filling their pockets in the gold rush or those racing at speed to stick their ‘technological flag’ in the sand to corner a marketplace. Alongside the clear innovation in products and new revenue streams for musicians at Jen, Shara’s inspiring strength and determination to get the ethical foundations right from the start are inspiring. An all-too-rare example of a service, contributing to a future where humans are empowered, valued and credited, within and for our collective global tools and knowledge.”
“At Jen, we are determined to create innovative products that invite artists to participate as AI reshapes the music industry, enabling their artistry to take new forms as technology evolves while ensuring they are respected and fairly compensated,” says Senderoff. “Our StyleFilter is a testament to this vision, introducing a groundbreaking way for users to collaborate with the musical essence of artists they might never have the chance to work with directly. Premiering this product with Imogen Heap, a pioneer at the intersection of music and technology, exemplifies our commitment to build with respect and reverence for those who paved the way. She’s also an incomparable human that I’m honored to call my friend.”
Canadian Music Week is undergoing a major identity shift.
For the first time since 1982, the music festival and conference will have a new name: Departure. The newly-christened Departure Festival + Conference will take place from May 6-11, 2025.
Loft Entertainment and Oak View Group (OVG) bought the festival from retiring founder Neill Dixon this year. They announced the changes in a cocktail reception on Tuesday (Nov. 12) at the festival’s new Toronto headquarters, Hotel X.
“Departure honours where we’ve come from and celebrates where we are going,” said Kevin Barton, executive producer at Loft Entertainment. “We’re creating a launchpad that opens doors to deeper, more inclusive conversations and showcases the richness of Toronto’s cultural scene, celebrates Canadian creatives, and welcomes global artists.”
In speeches and a fireside chat, Barton along with Loft co-founder Randy Lennox and chief operating officer Jackie Dean joined OVG Canada president Tom Pistore to share the new vision for the festival.
Trending on Billboard
Lennox and Barton pointed to the ambition of the event, which will expand to include comedy, tech and food in year one — plus film, fashion and other subjects in the near future. They will take big swings, which might mean they may have misses along the way, they acknowledged.
This year’s festival will include a songwriter showcase, comedy performances, food trucks, and a new app and digital infrastructure.
The goal with Departure is to expand and modernize, they said, while honouring the history of Canadian Music Week. Next year, they will honour CMW’s former leader Neill Dixon with a lifetime achievement award.
Comedian Russell Peters opened with his own less rehearsed speech, and shared his hopes for the festival. He’s both a comedian and a DJ, but says he and his friends had avoided CMW in the past “because it was soup — full of crackers.” He joked that the festival’s idea of diversification was Kardinal Offishall and that’s it.
Barton stressed an inclusivity mandate and said they have been meeting with different equity-seeking communities in the Canadian arts industry. Over 160 languages are spoken in Toronto, and the goal is to represent that multiculturalism.
Pistore said Departure is part of the Denver-based Oak View Group’s expanded footprint in Canada, which includes new hires and a $280 million project to transform an arena in Hamilton, Ontario. There is an ambition to be bigger, “but rooted in a Canadian foundation.”
The response on social media and at the industry event was mixed. Some were optimistic for the long-running conference to change and evolve and provide a bigger platform for Canadian artists. Others hoped that the new ownership, including the American Oak View Group, and removal of “Canadian” from the name, will not sacrifice the Canadian identity or the focus on the homegrown industry.
Karan Chahal is a music and business lawyer and agent at LSC Law. A former musician and engineer himself, he now works with independent artists, especially in Punjabi music, including producer Deep Jandhu.
Chahal has been attending CMW for years, and credits it as one of the most important conferences in Canada. He especially appreciated last year’s edition, which included a spotlight on India’s music industry and Punjabi music in Canada, he says.
“It’s an amazing platform, because everyone there is there for the same reason: music,” he says. “The music industry in Canada is still growing, and artists need support. There’s so much incredible talent here, and CMW is a spot where the artists, the labels, the agents can gain those relationships in the industry.”
Chahal’s hope is that Departure’s expanded focus into other areas will not dilute the support for music, specifically.
“I think we need more eyes on it, we need to grow it. More strategic individuals getting involved is only going to help,” he says. “I just hope we aren’t going to lose what it initially stood for, and will uphold the duty to support the culture.”
Rudy Blair is an independent music journalist and interviewer who has been covering Canadian Music Week for nearly 30 years. Over the past few years, he’s also worked for the festival under Dixon as a conference host.
Blair says the new name will take some getting used to, but he thinks the growth can only be a good thing.
“We always have to move forward, and as long as it shows respect for what came in the past, change is a good thing,” he says. “Moving forward, looking at things differently, presenting things differently, that always needs to happen. Departure is part of that evolution.
“The mandate from day 1, 42 years ago, to 2025 is the same,” he continues. “It is all about fans, artists, educating people, and making sure the rest of the world knows that Canada has some of the best talent in the world. As much as they’re looking at other things, I hope they keep the dream Neill (Dixon) had, which is promoting Canadian talent.”
This story originally was originally published by Billboard Canada.
Streaming music isn’t much of a social experience, but Hangout, a new music service that debuted Wednesday (Nov. 13), wants to change that.
Calling itself a “social platform,” Hangout, which is available on the web, iOS and Android, launched globally with more than 100 million songs available to stream thanks to licensing deals with the three major labels — Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group — and indie rights group Merlin.
“With our broad global partnerships across the music companies in place, Hangout begins its journey to redefine the intersection of music and social media,” founder/CEO Joseph Perla said in a statement. “Our vision has always been to create a platform that celebrates the joy of music but also helps support the music industry. Today marks a monumental step toward that goal.”
The idea is simple: People set up listening rooms and play music for guests. The DJs are represented by avatars on stage, standing aside turntables and moving to the rhythm of the music, while listeners’ avatars face the stage, only the back of their bobbing heads visible. The platform has two business models: Like Spotify and YouTube, Hangout will offer premium subscriptions that eliminate advertisements, while an avatar store will be another source of revenue, the company tells Billboard.
If Hangout looks familiar, that’s because the concept, look and feel is borrowed from Turntable.fm, a website that charmed listeners with its cartoonish and communal approach to streaming music. Perla was a co-founder of Turntable.fm and later worked at Facebook and Lyft before reviving the idea and raising capital from the likes of Founders Fund (an early investor in Spotify), Elizabeth Street Ventures and 468 Capital.
Trending on Billboard
Turntable.fm exploded onto computers in 2011 and quickly attracted a following. YouTube and the just-launched Spotify had more financing backing and secured licenses with record labels, but they weren’t as engaging for users as Turntable.fm. Imitators soon appeared, showing that entrepreneurs recognized that people wanted more options to stream music.
The early ‘10s was a different era, though. Good ideas were plentiful but countless startups either failed to build momentum or secure the necessary licenses to reach a large audience. Turntable.fm shut down in December 2013 after it ran into licensing problems, was forced to exclude users from outside the U.S. and nixed the ability for users to upload unlicensed tracks. Now, nearly any track people want to hear is readily available, and Hangout faces a friendlier licensing climate.
“We’re pleased to support the continued growth of opportunities for fans to experience and listen to Sony Music artists in shared social spaces that fairly value their work,” Mark Piibe, executive vp of global business development & digital strategy at Sony Music, said in a statement. “We’re pleased to support the continued growth of opportunities for fans to experience and listen to Sony Music artists in shared social spaces that fairly value their work.”
“Social listening continues to become a key component of the fan experience, driving loyalty and conversation amongst engaged artist communities and Hangout will help power these fan experiences in a unique and compelling way,” added Kristen Bender, senior vp of digital innovation strategy & business development at Universal Music Group.
“We’re thrilled to partner with Hangout to bring our diverse catalog of artists to this innovative music platform,” said Rachel Scarpati, vp of business strategy & business development at Warner Music Group. “This partnership underscores WMG’s commitment to pioneering new avenues for music discovery, fostering community, and providing fans with dynamic ways to engage and share their love for music.”
And at Merlin, Ryan McWhinnie, vp of business & legal affairs, said, “Community is at the center of independent music. This partnership with Hangout brings new opportunities for our global membership and their artists to connect with fans and broaden their communities.”
By the time Elvis Presley’s Comeback Special was taped in 1968, The King was not just on the ropes but nearly down for the count. A lengthy period in the wilderness starring in commercially successful but critically derided musicals throughout the 1960s had left his reputation in tatters as a new wave of musicians rose to prominence. There was hope, however, that a stellar performance at the special — for which a new song, “If I Can Dream,” was written — could help him win back the hearts of the American people.
This moment in time is where Elvis Evolution, an upcoming experiential installation in London, will begin for its audience. Set to debut at the recently-opened Immerse LDN in May 2025, the show’s creators view this as the moment when Presley was at his most vulnerable and authentic, making it the perfect jumping-off point for an odyssey that will trace the arc of his musical journey — from his upbringing in rural Mississippi to Memphis’ iconic Sun Studios and Beale Street to the backlots of NBC Studios in Burbank, California, where the Comeback Special was shot.
Trending on Billboard
To bring Presley’s musical journey to life, Elvis Evolution will utilize archival material and cutting-edge technology, including generative artificial intelligence, holograms and projections, alongside live music performances from a house band and themed set designs. The show comes from Layered Reality, a production company that fuses digital technology with live theater, and Academy Award-winning special effects company The Mill. In 2023, the former secured the rights from the Presley estate and Authentic Brand Group to license the icon’s image and likeness.
The announcement of Elvis Evolution came amid renewed interest in Presley’s life and music. In 2022, Baz Luhrmann’s jukebox epic Elvis told the story of the singer and his rocky relationship with manager Colonel Tom Parker. And Sofia Coppola’s 2023 movie Priscilla examined his first and only marriage from the perspective of his wife.
[embedded content]
Contrary to those interpretations, Elvis Evolution’s director Jack Pirie — who shares a co-writing credit with playwright Jessica Siân — says the show will remain focused strictly on the music. “What I hope we can do with this show is to move away from the myth of what Elvis represented and the image of him in his later years in a white jumpsuit in Las Vegas,” he says. “We want to go back to who he was as a kid, and look at the music he was listening to and how that shaped him.”
Pirie says Elvis Evolution resulted from the success of other, similarly tech-heavy experiences to debut in the U.K. recently. In 2023, cutting-edge digital art venue Outernet in central London attracted more visitors (6.25 million) than the British Museum (5.83 million). The wildly popular Abba Voyage experience, which started in 2022 and features performing avatars of the Swedish pop group, just extended its run into May 2025.
Even Taylor Swift‘s Eras Tour concert film, which was released in cinemas to big grosses last year, was cited by Pirie as an example of music fans being willing to celebrate in “a non-traditional environment.”
“Elvis didn’t sit at home listening to music on his phone, he had to go out and seek and experience it,” says Andrew McGuinness, founder/CEO of Layered Reality, which previously produced an immersive version of Jeff Wayne’s War of The Worlds musical and The Gunpowder Plot starring Tom Felton. “The fact that live music runs through the DNA of the story makes it a great property to do it this way.”
Elvis Evolution initially caused controversy when it was revealed that the show would use generative artificial intelligence to help recreate Presley in hologram form. But McGuinness and Pirie tell Billboard that the technology is being used only to enhance authentic moments in Presley’s career. For example, they say the technology will help bring new perspectives and sightlines to the ‘68 Comeback Special, for which only limited camera angles exist. As with any powerful tool, says McGuinness, you need to be “bloody careful” with how AI is employed: “We’re not trying to confect something and we take the responsibility with the utmost importance,” he says.
Tickets went on sale for Elvis Evolution in October, and only a limited number remain available through the show’s opening weeks — specifically, May 10 to June 1. The 110-minute experience will have timed entry, with several performances set to take place each day. Tickets start at £75 ($97), while VIP packages are also available, including the “Burning Love” experience, which includes additional merchandise and VIP seating, and the “If I Can Dream” package, which features tickets to the show, commemorative merch and premium access to the show’s daily after-party.
The show’s venue, Immerse LDN, opened at the Royal Docks’ ExCel convention center in July 2024 and is currently hosting both the Formula 1 Exhibition and The Friends Experience: The One In London, both of which use multi-sensory technology and set design. The immersive venue, which will total 160,000 square feet once completed, is part of a £300 million ($387 million) investment in ExCel.
McGuinness and Pirie’s hope is that Elvis Evolution will be successful enough to be toured globally, and they’re particularly excited about the prospect of taking it to some of the U.S. locations that have strong roles in his story, from Las Vegas to Memphis and beyond.
The show’s success could also create opportunities for similar experiences around other music icons; while McGuinness notes that the commercial demands and scale of such events make only a small group of artists “suitable,” he says discussions have already begun between Layered Reality and other artists’ estates.
Though Presley’s outsized legend makes him one of the few artists, living or dead, to be well-suited for such an elaborate and expensive production, McGuinness adds that one of the goals of the project was to strip away the iconography and get to the root of the person he was.
“There’s a humanity that can get lost with any musician or celebrity, and before I started this project, I was prone to seeing Elvis just as an ‘icon,’” he says. “But within this experience, you get to see him as a man, too.”
Megadeth and lead singer Dave Mustaine have agreed to pay $1.4 million to resolve allegations that they still owed commissions to a long-time manager after he was “unceremoniously” fired and replaced by Mustaine’s son.
The deal will resolve claims in a lawsuit filed last year by Cory Brennan and his Five B Artist Management, which alleged that Mustaine was refusing to hand over more than $1 million in unpaid commissions after abruptly terminating Brennan in early 2023.
In a filing made public on Wednesday (Nov. 13), attorneys for Brennan alerted a Los Angeles judge that Mustaine and Megadeth had agreed to pay the manager and Five B a total of $1,400,006 to end the litigation over those accusations.
Trending on Billboard
The settlement will not end the dispute entirely. Mustaine countersued Brennan last year, claiming his tenure as manager had been “plagued with missteps” that caused serious harm, including damaging Mustaine’s hearing. Those claims were not resolved by the settlement and will continue to be litigated.
In a statement to Billboard on Wednesday, Brennan’s attorney, Howard King, said that while his client was “displeased at having to sue an artist,” he was “gratified” by the settlement payment.
“Dave Mustaine, who has a known history of firing advisors, terminated Five B Artist Management after 9 years of their having resurrected his failing career,” King said. “Ignoring the success Five B had helped Dave achieve, including a campaign to help him win his first Grammy, the release of two hit albums, and the elevation of his touring from small clubs back to arenas and amphitheaters, Dave simply refused to pay commissions owing and forced 5B to file a lawsuit.”
Mustaine’s attorney, Richard Busch, did not immediately return a request for comment on the settlement.
In a June 2023 lawsuit, Brennan alleged that Mustaine had sought him out in 2014 to “manage his career and get it back on track,” following an extended downturn in commercial and critical success in which the beloved thrash metal band “seemed to have lost their way.” Over the next nine years, Brennan said he had “worked tirelessly” for Mustaine, including “helping him with his personal struggles” and successfully re-establishing Megadeth as “one of the greatest metal bands of all time.”
But the lawsuit claimed that Mustaine abruptly fired Brennan in early 2023, leaving him owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid touring commissions and hundreds of thousands more in merchandise commissions.
“Despite this success and their long-term relationship, on April 28, 2023, Mustaine, through his lawyer, unexpectedly and unceremoniously terminated Plaintiffs, stating no reason for the termination,” the lawsuit alleged. “The decision was made to help send business to Mustaine’s son, who has been trying to build a career in artist management.”
Months later, Megadeth and Mustaine fired back with a countersuit of their own, claiming that Brennan had been fired due to “repeated management failures” that had “dealt serious blows to Megadeth’s reputation and even David Mustaine’s physical health.”
Mustaine’s lawyers claimed that both sides had always agreed that each would “go their separate ways” following any split between Brennan and the band — and the lawsuit was simply retaliation because the ex-manager was “upset” that his “mishandling” of the band’s business had finally “caught up with him.”
“The cross-defendants’ unfounded claims are nothing more than an attempt to capstone their years of mistreatment with extortionate demands for money not earned by cross-defendants nor owed by cross-plaintiffs,” Busch wrote in the complaint.
Since the initial accusations and counter-claims, the case had spent months in discovery — the process of exchanging evidence in a litigation. No rulings on the merits of the cases have yet been issued.
Following the settlement of Brennan’s claims, Mustaine’s accusations of wrongdoing against him — including breach of contract and negligence — will continue toward an eventual trial.
This story was published as part of Billboard’s music technology newsletter ‘Machine Learnings.’
Sign up for ‘Machine Learnings,’ and Billboard’s other newsletters, here.
Last week, Universal Music Group filed a $500 million lawsuit against TuneCore and its parent company Believe over alleged copyright infringement of UMG’s recordings. The lawsuit presented two core issues: first, that bad actors used TuneCore to upload songs to streaming services that were simply sped up or remixed versions of UMG-copyrighted recordings, often listed under slight misspellings of the real artist, like “Kendrik Laamar” or “Arriana Gramde.” Second, it claimed that “Believe has taken advantage of the content management claiming system” on YouTube “to divert” and “delay… payment of royalties” that belong to record labels.
If you’ve been following the issues in this case over the last few years, this lawsuit feels like a long time coming, and the issues that UMG raises are certainly not just a TuneCore-specific issue — they’re an industry-wide DIY distribution issue. With the vast scale of songs being uploaded through these companies, and staffs that are too small to catch every bad actor, infringing material has, according to just about everybody, flooded onto streaming services.
The distributors know it’s a problem, too. It’s why TuneCore, DistroKid, CD Baby, Symphonic, Downtown and more formed the Music Fights Fraud coalition in 2023 and say they have increasingly invested in preventing fraud and infringement. Unfortunately, Beatdapp, the industry leader in identifying streaming fraud, believes the problem has only worsened since then. UMG is also not convinced that TuneCore is doing enough, saying that the company’s business model incentivizes them to “turn a blind eye” to this damaging activity.
Below, I’ve condensed some of the arguments I’ve heard among industry leaders both for and against DIY distribution continuing just as it is today. I’ll let you judge which outcome is better.
Trending on Billboard
Argument #1: Why its essential to protect DIY distribution as is
It’s easy to take for granted today that anyone who wants to release a song can do it themselves, but that wasn’t always the case. When physical records reigned supreme, record label contracts often favored the companies involved, and seldom went the artists’ way. At the time, artists were essentially forced to sign to a record label if they wanted a chance at shelf space in stores — especially worldwide. This left artists vulnerable to unequal label deals that locked them in for many albums while the label took the lion’s share of the royalties and the copyrights, often in perpetuity.
When Distrokid, CD Baby, TuneCore and the like emerged in the 2000s, they let anyone sign up for distribution services to digital outlets like the iTunes Store for a flat fee and forever altered the power dynamic. Today, the playing field has leveled significantly: hobbyists can get their music out to the world and artists with professional aspirations can wait as long as they want before they have to give up a single percentage point of their master recordings to a label. These companies helped shift negotiating power to the artists, and for the first time, started the process of allowing music fans to decide what songs would pop, rather than the labels that pulled favors with the gatekeepers who worked in radio, retail and the press.
The shift also presented a new, lucrative business opportunity. Music companies no longer need superstars in their catalogs to make their numbers. In fact, they don’t need catalogs at all. A company can now make money by providing services, like distribution, to the masses of previously-overlooked musical hopefuls instead, relying on volume to make up the numbers.
But that volume allowed for the proliferation of fraud, which is a problem that evolves every day, and bad people will always find loopholes. Already, most distributors have implemented common-sense regulations and checks to curb fraud and invested money into quality control teams. But for many experts, it feels impossible to totally solve the problem. As it’s commonly said, this is an endless game of “wack-a-mole.”
But if the barriers to DIY distribution are too significant — like limiting the number of releases, gating who can use it, hiking the platform fee, adding a streaming threshold, or slowing down release time — it could take power away from indie musicians that they have become accustomed to. Such a move would be a step backward for artistic freedom, and the cost of implementing these regulations could threaten to put some of the smaller distributors out of business. Less choice and competition in DIY distribution isn’t better for users.
It’s impossible to put the DIY distribution genie back in the bottle. Artists, who have become used to the current system, would still find ways to get their music out there quickly and cheaply — whether fraudulent or not. Likely, that music would go out on social media or to social-streaming hybrids like YouTube and SoundCloud, both of which pay out royalties and can still be cheated. Streaming services, like Spotify, Apple and Amazon, would risk losing listenership and music discovery to social media platforms — something they already struggle with in today’s TikTok era — and it might not even solve the problems it targeted.
Argument #2: Why the DIY distribution system is in need of serious reform
Currently, over 120,000 songs are uploaded to streaming services every day, a rate that has rapidly increased for years and will likely continue to do so. This is mostly due to DIY distributors. While it is great that aspiring artists can get their music out there cheaply and easily, this has also led to rampant fraud and copyright infringement that puts excessive burdens on rights holders to police their own catalogs online. What happens when we inevitably get to a point where 1 million songs are uploaded every day? We can’t keep going as we are now, and we are in need of serious reform.
While DIY distributors have announced initiatives like Music Fights Fraud and have hosted panels at industry conferences to explain the new methods they are using to stop bad actors, some people say these companies have an incentive for at least some of it to slip by their watch, given their business models rely on receiving fees in exchange for uploading as many songs as possible. Self-policing is not enough, considering this problem only seems to get worse.
The introduction of generative AI has made this matter even more pressing. While it’s impossible to know how much of the music being uploaded today is AI-generated, and to date the streaming services have no regulations against this, it is certainly contributing to the rising number of songs released to streaming services per day. AI songs are believed to be exploited by bad actors to commit streaming fraud, as we saw in the September lawsuit which alleged a musician named Michael “Mike” Smith stole $10 million in streaming royalties by uploading AI-generated songs using a distributor and then used bots to stream them. Bad actors upload AI songs en masse to spread out artificial streams and make their schemes tougher to detect.
It’s hard to argue that it makes a user’s streaming experience better when a platform has a vast number of AI songs and tracks that not a single person has streamed, and it’s clear that these songs, largely stemming from DIY distributors, are diluting the royalty pool at the expense of what some stakeholders have called “professional artists.” The negligibly low payments earned by hobbyists who have accrued hundreds or just a few thousand streams are sometimes lower than the fees one would incur from transferring the royalties into their bank account.
These distributors, the argument goes, should be penalized for the bad actors they let through. This has been proposed in many forms so far, including a financial penalty instituted by streaming services, requirements for significant “know your customer” checks to slow down uploads and verify users’ identities, a minimum stream count threshold before artists can be eligible for royalty collection, a limit to the number of songs a user can upload at a time, an additional fee for storing massive uploads to streaming services, and more.
It’s not a viable business if you rely on a massive scale of song uploads but can’t afford the proper staffers and tools to police them.
Universal Music Group wants a federal judge to dismiss a copyright lawsuit claiming Mary J. Blige’s 1992 hit “Real Love” used a famed 1973 funk sample without a license, arguing the accusers have popped up “out of the blue” to sue over two tracks that “sound nothing alike.”
The case, filed in earlier this year by Tuff City Records, claims Blige’s track borrowed from “Impeach the President” by the Honey Drippers — a legendary piece of hip-hop source material with a drum track that’s been sampled or interpolated by Run-DMC, Dr. Dre, Doja Cat and many others over the years.
But in a response on Tuesday, UMG argues that Tuff City’s case is deeply flawed and must be tossed out of court at the outset.
Trending on Billboard
“Now, more than 30 years after ‘Real Love’ was released, plaintiff appears out of the blue alleging that ‘Real Love’ contains an uncleared sample from ‘Impeach the President,’ with no allegations concerning the works’ substantial similarity,” the music giant wrote. “The absence of that allegation is fatal.”
One key claim in Tuff City’s lawsuit is that UMG’s recorded music unit (UMG Recordings, Inc.) has already reached a settlement regarding the use of the “Impeach” sample on the “Real Love” sound recording, but that UMG’s publishing arm is unfairly refusing to do the same for the musical composition.
In Tuesday’s response, UMG confirmed the existence of that earlier settlement over the sound recording, but said it was entirely separate and complete “irrelevant” to a dispute over the composition. UMG’s attorneys said the settlement did not admit that “Real Love” infringed “Impeach” — but that even if it had, Tuff City was “confusing” a basic distinction that lies at the heart of music copyright law.
“Plaintiff … insinuates that defendant infringes simply because non-party UMG settled plaintiff’s claim of infringement [over] the sound recording,” the company wrote. “Because there exist two separate copyrights in music … a work can readily infringe one without infringing the other.”
Blige’s “Real Love” spent 31 weeks on the Hot 100 in 1992 and reached a peak of No. 7 on the chart. It has remained one of the star’s most enduring hits, with more than 105 million spins on Spotify and a movie adaptation released by Lifetime last year.
Tuff City sued UMG over the track in April, claiming it had “advised defendant repeatedly” about the allegedly uncleared sample, but that Universal had done nothing about it: “Defendant has repeatedly refused to engage plaintiff in substantive negotiations to rectify the foregoing, let alone agreed to compensate plaintiff for the past infringement or on an ongoing basis.”
The lawsuit did not name Blige herself as a defendant nor accuse her of any wrongdoing.
Tuff City, which owns a large catalog of old songs, is no stranger to copyright litigation – filing cases over tracks by Jay-Z, Beastie Boys, Christina Aguilera, Frank Ocean with claims that they featured unlicensed samples or interpolations. The company has even already sued over “Impeach the President,” claiming in a 1991 complaint that it had been illegally sampled on the LL Cool J tracks “Around the Way Girl” and “Six Minutes of Pleasure.”
The company has won plenty of rulings and settlements, but the litigation process has not always gone smoothly. In 2014, a judge dismissed one Tuff City case over Jay-Z’s “Run This Town” on the grounds that any alleged sample was “barely perceptible” after multiple listens. In that ruling, the judge chided Tuff City over its approach to the case, saying it “incorrectly … assumes that every copying of any part of another artist’s protected work is infringement.”
In Tuesday’s motion seeking to dismiss the “Real Love” case, UMG directly cited that 2014 ruling – arguing that the two songs “sound nothing alike” and that Tuff City had failed to argue otherwise.
“Unwilling to learn from the lessons of its past, plaintiff again seeks to assert copyright liability without plausibly pleading substantial similarity with respect to the musical compositions at issue here,” the company wrote. “The copyright claim must accordingly be dismissed.”
An attorney for Tuff City did not immediately return a request for comment.