State Champ Radio Legal News
Page: 121
Music publishing companies Reservoir Media Management and PopArabia are suing Anghami Technologies Limited and its parent, Nasdaq-listed Anghami Inc., the Middle East’s largest legal streaming company, for copyright infringement related to a dozen Western and Arabic songs from artists like Lil Jon, 50 Cent and Kelly Clarkson.
The suit was filed Dec. 22 at the Abu Dhabi Global Markets Court.
In the filing, a copy of which Billboard procured, the court says the claim by Reservoir and PopArabia involves “the exploitation of a small number of songs in one territory” but that “the Anghami service exploits a very large number of songs in numerous territories across the Middle East region and beyond.”
Anghami is primarily a freemium audio-streaming service that says it has more than 73 million users across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), Europe and the United States, and a library of over 57 million songs. The service, which was launched by co-founders Elie Habib and Eddy Maroun in Beirut in 2012, relocated its headquarters in 2021 from Lebanon to Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, where it’s part of the Abu Dhabi Global Market. (Anghami also operates a subscription service called “Anghami Plus” that allows users to download songs.)
PopArabia, which describes itself as the “leading music publisher” in the MENA region, is also based out of Abu Dhabi. In 2020, PopArabia entered into a joint venture with Reservoir to sign and develop Arab talent
The suit names 12 songs, including such international hits as “Take Me Home, Country Roads,” by John Denver; “Candy Shop,” written by Scott Storch and 50 Cent; “Yeah!” written by Lil Jon; “I Gotta Feeling,” co-written by Frédéric Riesterer; “Havana,” “Señorita” and “Break My Heart,” co-written by Ali Tamposi; and “Because Of You,” written by Kelly Clarkson, David Hodges and Ben Moody.
The Arabic tracks are “Laa,” written by Bassem Funky and Dok Dok; “Number 1,” written by Mohamed Saber, Fawzy Hassan, Islam Mohamed Ali and Abdel Hakim; and “LV COCO” and “Hallelujah” by Moroccan hip-hop star 7Liwa.
Reservoir and PopArabia are seeking an injunction to restrain Anghami from infringing its copyrights, as well as unspecified damages, interest and costs. The applicable law for the claim is U.K. Private International Law, the court says.
In an email response to Billboard, Saurabh Poddar, Anghami’s head of licensing, says the company intends to defend itself against the lawsuit. “Despite having this claim for a handful of songs, we assert that Anghami is more than willing to sign a license with publishers no matter how small or big they are, as long as such license is negotiated and implemented with a scientific method with regards to identification of actual market share, legal capacity and provided representation is confirmed especially in the case of a sub-publisher,” Poddar says.
A spokesperson for PopArabia says the company does not comment on ongoing litigation but notes that “we do take the protection of our rights and those of songwriters very seriously and believe it is essential to the development of a healthy ecosystem for music creators, which we have championed for in the UAE for over a decade.”
Anghami says on its website that it has licensing agreements in place with major international and Arabic music labels, as well as with “thousands of independent labels and distributors.”
In their suit, Reservoir and PopArabia counter that “while [Anghami] may indeed have licensed the copyright in certain sound recordings from record companies, it has not…obtained any license to use the underlying musical and lyrical works which are embodied in the sound recordings which it offers to consumers for streaming and downloading, or to reproduce the lyrics of those Songs.”
Two sources with knowledge of the case tell Billboard that in the past Anghami has questioned PopArabia about whether the company owns the rights it says it does. “In these court cases, one of the things that they will always challenge you on is the chain of title,” says a leading executive from a global publishing company who spoke to Billboard on background. “It’s much easier for PopArabia to instigate the case using [a handful of] works that they have directly signed to them.”
Licensing negotiations between PopArabia and Anghami were ongoing for at least three years before they reached a stalemate, says the source. “That’s when the question was raised, are they actually genuine in these attempts to license?”
Abu Dhabi-based media executive Michael Garin, who says he has seen the correspondence between the two companies, tells Billboard that Anghami has made licensing deals with the three major record companies, “who clearly protect their [own] intellectual property rights.” But in the case of Anghami, “it’s my understanding that for 10 years they’ve been using music from the region and from smaller publishers who they just felt were either too ignorant, too disorganized [or] too naive to ever sue for the collection of their rights,” says Garin, the former CEO of film and entertainment company Image Nation and media hub twofour54, of which PopArabia is “an investment and portfolio company.” (Anghami did not respond to Garin’s assertions.)
Garin, who until recently was also the director-general of the Abu Dhabi Creative Media Authority, a governmental organization, says he has been “working for the past decade to help protect the intellectual property rights of content creators.”
On the support section of its website, Anghami says it generates and pays out royalties after deducting 8% for publishing rights from revenues to be paid to music-collecting societies such as SACEM. However, SACEM no longer has a licensing deal with the platform.
“In 2018, we succeeded in getting a settlement with Anghami to cover the period of exploitation [from 2012] until 2018, but from 2019 we do not have any agreement,” says Julien Dumon, the director of development, phono and digital at SACEM. Significantly, the deal, which excluded the United States, covered usage in Europe and the Middle East. Talks for a renewal have been ongoing since 2019, says Dumon.
“We have been negotiating for close to five years now,” he says. “The fact that nothing has been signed whereas on the other side, SACEM has been able to close deals within a year with all the other actors in the industry clearly demonstrates that Anghami is not willing to properly engage and get an agreement in place.” (Anghami did not respond to a question about negotiations with SACEM.)
The Middle East and North Africa is the fastest-growing music market in the world, as per the IFPI’s Global Music Report for 2022, which said revenues from recorded music in the region grew by 35% in 2021 to $89.5 million. Streaming accounts for 95% of those revenues. A consumer research study conducted by the IFPI in April surveyed over 1,500 people aged 16 to 44 in the UAE and found that 54% of the respondents “typically listen to at least one Middle Eastern genre.”
With a claimed 58% share of the music streaming market in the region, Anghami is the dominant player; at least one report has said that Spotify was considering buying the streamer.
According to a source close to the matter, Anghami initially submitted a jurisdictional challenge to the case filed by Reservoir and PopArabia and subsequently withdrew it. The streamer now has about a month to file a response in the ADGM Court.
Beyond the copyright lawsuit, Anghami faces other challenges. The streaming service said in November that it was trimming its headcount by 22%, or roughly 39 employees, in order to maintain profitability. And on Jan. 9 the company received a notice from the Nasdaq indicating Anghami was not in compliance with the stock market’s listing rules due to its failure to file an interim balance sheet and income statement for its second quarter of 2022, according to a company filing. Nasdaq gave the company until Mar. 10 to submit a plan to regain compliance.
A woman who is suing Nick Carter over accusations that he raped her in 2001 now says the Backstreet Boys member is trying to “harass and intimidate” her with meritless counterclaims about a “conspiracy.”
A month after Shannon “Shay” Ruth filed her lawsuit in December, Carter countersued — claiming he’d been the victim of a “five-year conspiracy” that aimed to “to harass, defame and extort” him by exploiting the MeToo movement.
But in a filing Wednesday, Ruth’s lawyers said those counterclaims were brought with “no other purpose than to harass, intimate, and potentially silence plaintiff.”
“He seeks to use his wealth and celebrity status to outlast plaintiff,” Ruth’s lawyers wrote. “All while hiding behind being the ‘victim’ of the ‘#MeToo’ movement and the preposterous notion that plaintiff is only seeking attention and publicity.”
Ruth’s lawyers want the case dismissed under Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute — a type of law enacted in states around the country that aims to make it easier to quickly dismiss cases that threaten free speech.
“Fortunately, Nevada is among approximately 31 states that have enacted a statutory scheme to prevent such suits or, at minimum, limit their nefarious intent by requiring a party to demonstrate there is a probability of success on the merits before their claim can progress,” Ruth’s lawyers wrote. “This is the very definition of a SLAPP lawsuit, and it should not be allowed to progress.”
A representative for Carter did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday.
Ruth sued Carter in December, claiming he raped her when she was 17 years old following a 2001 concert in Washington state. Now 39, Ruth says she waited more than 20 years to come forward because she was afraid of retaliation.
“He told plaintiff she would go to jail if she told anyone what happened between them,” Ruth’s lawyers wrote at the time. “He said that he was Nick Carter, and that he had the power to do that. Due to his various threats, plaintiff did not report Carter’s crimes for many years.”
Carter fired back in January, claiming Ruth had been manipulated into bringing the allegations by Melissa Schuman Henschel — a former member of the teen-pop group Dream who previously accused Carter of assaulting her in 2003. “Ruth was a vulnerable and highly impressionable individual, craving attention and desperate to fit in,” his lawyers wrote.
In legal terms, Carter’s countersuit accuses Ruth, Schuman and Schuman’s father of defamation and other forms of wrongdoing. But in Wednesday’s motion to dismiss the case, Ruth’s lawyers said Carter would not be able to prevail on those allegations because he is a “public figure” – a status that makes it hard to sue for defamation in American courts.
“By his own admission of being an ‘American icon,’ Carter is by definition a ‘general public figure’ in Nevada,” Ruth’s lawyers wrote. “As such, the burden he must meet to defeat an anti-SLAPP motion is significantly higher than would be for the average citizen, and he cannot meet that burden in this matter.”
Bronx drill rapper Kay Flock is among eight members of Bronx gangs Sev Side and Third Side being charged with murder and racketeering, among other “violent offenses,” according to the Department of Justice. The Thursday (Feb. 23) press release also detailed charges related to, “attempted murder and assault with a dangerous weapon arising from seven shootings committed in the Bronx between June 2020 and February 2022.”
Six of the charged individuals, including Kay Flock — born Kevin Perez — are in police custody, while the remaining two are named in the release as fugitives. “Over a span of several years, the members of these gangs allegedly terrorized neighborhoods in the Bronx and Manhattan by killing and shooting other people. Through these charges, we will hold Sev Side and Third Side members responsible for plaguing our communities with gun violence,” said U.S. Attorney Damian Williams in a statement.
Kay Flock is currently awaiting arraignment in Manhattan Criminal Court on the federal charges. His alleged crimes carry a punishment of “mandatory life in prison or death,” according to the Department of Justice.
Kay Flock’s team did not respond to Billboard‘s request for comment at the time of publication.
The new charges add to 19-year-old Kay Flock’s collection of legal troubles, most notably his alleged 2021 murder of Hwascar “Oscar” Hernandez outside a Hamilton Heights barbershop in New York City, on which he is currently awaiting trial. Despite his growing rap sheet and the fact that he’s currently behind bars, he has continued to release new music, most recently The D.O.A. Tape [Care Package] in December 2022. Last year, Kay Flock’s single “Shake It” featuring Cardi B, Dougie B and Bory300 made quite the buzz, appearing on both the Billboard Hot 100, where it peaked at No. 51, and Billboard‘s US Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs, where it peaked at No. 14.
New York City mayor Eric Adams has publicly declared his disdain for the drill genre, linking it to violence and crime in the city. Since entering office in January 2022, the retired police captain has cracked down on artists in the genre, with the NYPD shutting down a number of drill performances. In September, drill rappers 22Gz, Sha Ek and Ron Suno were dropped from the Rolling Loud NYC lineup at the NYPD’s request. Other notable New York drill artists including Dusty Locane and Sheff G are also behind bars, while 22Gz is awaiting trial on attempted murder charges.
A woman who sued Marilyn Manson for sexual assault says in a new legal filing that the allegations were untrue, claiming she had been “manipulated” by the rocker’s ex-girlfriend, Evan Rachel Wood.
With Manson currently suing Wood for allegedly orchestrating an “organized attack” of false rape accusations, the singer’s lawyers filed a bombshell statement Thursday (Feb. 23) from Ashley Morgan Smithline — one of several women who has accused Manson of sexual abuse over the past two years.
In it, Smithline claims that she had been “manipulated by Ms. Wood” and others, and eventually had agreed to “spread publicly false accusations of abuse” against Manson (real name Brian Warner).
“I succumbed to pressure from Evan Rachel Wood and her associates to make accusations of rape and assault against Mr. Warner that were not true,” Smithline wrote in the sworn statement. “Eventually, I started to believe that what I was repeatedly told happened to Ms. Wood and [others] also happened to me.”
In a statement to Billboard, a spokesperson for Wood strongly denied Smithline’s accusations: “Evan never pressured or manipulated Ashley. It was Ashley who first contacted Evan about the abuse she had suffered. It’s unfortunate that the harassment and threats Ashley received after filing her federal lawsuit appear to have pressured her to change her testimony.”
The statement by Smithline is a major revelation in Manson’s two-year legal saga, in which at least five women have accused him of serious sexual wrongdoing. After Wood posted her allegations to Instagram in February 2021, lawsuits quickly followed from Smithline, Manson’s former assistant Ashley Walters, Game of Thrones actress Esme Bianco and a Jane Doe accuser.
Smithline’s case was dismissed last month after she fired her lawyer and stopped participating in the case.
Manson has denied all of the allegations and filed his own defamation lawsuit in March 2022 claiming that Wood and another woman, Illma Gore, had “secretly recruited, coordinated, and pressured prospective accusers to emerge simultaneously” with false accusations against him.
In her declaration on Thursday, Smithline told a story that supported Manson’s allegations against Wood. She said she had been initially contacted by other alleged victims and, when she denied that such abuse had happened to her, was repeatedly told that she might just not remember it.
“While at first I knew Mr. Warner did not do these things to me, I eventually I began to question whether he actually did,” Smithline wrote. “On numerous occasions, I was told … that I may just be misremembering what happened, repressing my memories of what happened, or that my memories had not yet surfaced — which they said happened to people against whom these acts were perpetrated.”
Eventually, Smithline said she agreed to participate. She said Gore drafted an accusation statement for her and posted it to her account for her, and that she was then connected with Jay Ellwanger, the same lawyer who represented Bianco.
“Leading up to the filing of the complaint, I felt pressured by Mr. Ellwanger to go on a press tour, which included an interview on The View and an interview and photoshoot with People magazine,” Smithline wrote. “I was very uncomfortable doing this press but felt pressured to do it.”
Smithline also noted that she had “never received any money” from Manson as part of any settlement agreement to stop pursuing her case and that she did not intend to refile her case against him.
“Looking back, I feel I was manipulated by Ms. Wood, Ms. Gore, Ms. Bianco, and Mr. Ellwanger to spread publicly false accusations of abuse against Mr. Warner,” Smithline wrote.
In a statement to Billboard, Ellwanger said that his response to Smithline’s allegations was “constrained by ethical obligations regarding client confidentiality” to his former client. “But what I can say is that the specific allegations regarding my representation of Ms. Smithline are categorically and verifiably false.”
The new revelations come as Wood’s attorneys are seeking to dismiss Manson’s case by citing California’s so-called anti-SLAPP statute — a law that aims to make it easier to dismiss cases that threaten free speech. Wood’s lawyers say Manson’s case is exactly that: an effort to punish Wood after she chose to speak publicly about years of abuse.
“For years, plaintiff Brian Warner raped and tortured defendant Evan Rachel Wood and threatened retaliation if she told anyone about it,” her attorneys wrote. “Warner has now made good on those threats by filing the present lawsuit.”
Manson’s attorneys want to cite Thursday’s new statements from Smithline as a reason to deny the anti-SLAPP motion since such motions require courts to assess the validity of a case’s allegations. In asking the court to heed the filing, they wrote: “This newly obtained evidence is critical to Warner’s opposition to the anti-SLAPP motions, in which defendants argue that there is no ‘admissible evidence substantiating his allegations.’”
In a statement to Billboard, Manson’s attorney, Howard King, said Smithline’s declaration “proves” that the lawsuit’s core accusations are true. “As we have always said, the coordinated campaign of #MeToo lies against Brian Warner is going to go down as one of the greatest hoaxes of all time,” King said. “Vulnerable women were manipulated by unscrupulous individuals seeking to build their own brands and pursue their own vendettas.”
Read Smithline’s entire declaration here:
Two former Iowa tourism officials were each sentenced to more than a year in prison after pleading guilty to bank fraud charges related to a failed 2018 music festival headlined by Maroon 5 and Kelly Clarkson.
Aaron McCreight, 48, was sentenced to 18 months, and Doug Hargrave, 56, was sentenced to 15 months over charges that they lied to a Cedar Rapids bank in order to finance Newbo Evolve, a three-day music and cultural event held in the city in August 2018.
Prosecutors said the pair – executives at a local promotional group called Go Cedar Rapids — submitted inflated data about the event’s underwhelming ticket sales and projected revenues, and that they lied to the bank that Newbo Evolve was expected to turn a small profit.
In reality, McCreight and Hargrave expected to lose more than $600,000, prosecutors said. The festival eventually lost more than $2 million, and was unable to repay most of the loan to the bank. 97 vendors that provided services to the festival lost a combined $800,000 unpaid fees.
The two men — former executives at a local promotional group called Go Cedar Rapids — each pleaded guilty last January to a single charge of bank fraud.
In addition to the prison time, McCreight and Hargrave were ordered to jointly repay a combined $1.4 million in restitution, and each will be subject to three years of supervised release after their prison terms are complete.
Newbo Evolve was held in Cedar Rapids from Aug. 3-5, 2018, featuring performances by Maroon 5, Kelly Clarkson, The Wallflowers, Robert DeLong and others.
According to court documents, McCreight, Hargrave and Go Cedar Rapids secured $1.5 million in initial funding from a local bank, telling the lender they expected to sell 11,000 tickets to each of the two headliners and 4,000 three-day passes to the entire festival.
But three months after tickets went on sale, McCreight reported internally that tickets were “not selling as originally budgeted.” By June, the group had sold just just 6,500 total tickets and was internally projecting a loss of $644,846 — with deadlines to pay the artists and vendors looming.
“As the Newbo Evolve event dates approached, GoCR did not have enough money to, among other things, pay Kelly Clarkson, pay production costs, and buy the alcohol that was to be sold at the concert venue,” prosecutors wrote. “Without additional funding, Newbo Evolve would have to be cancelled.”
Faced with that pressure, court documents show, McCreight and Hargrave committed bank fraud. Reporting that ticket sales had “spiked” in recent weeks, they falsely told the bank that 15,000 total tickets had been sold and that the event was forecast to turn a profit of $65,653. And the move worked: the bank eventually extended their line of credit to $2,200,000.
“Ultimately, Newbo Evolve lost more than $2 million,” prosecutors wrote in charging documents. “As a result, GoCR was unable to repay much of its loan from the lending bank when the loan was due.”
When he pleaded guilty last year, an attorney for McCreight told Billboard that he was a “good man” who made a “bad decision” under “extreme pressures.”
“His motive was not based in personal greed, but in an attempt to salvage the Newbo Evolve event for the Cedar Rapids community,” said attorney William White. “Had the event sold more tickets and been profitable, it is unlikely any prosecution would have ensued. However, that was not the case, and Mr. McCreight accepts his involvement in the lending bank losing money and is extremely remorseful.”
Attorneys for both McCreight and Hargrave were not immediately available for comment on the prison sentences.
Read the full judgments against McCreight and Hargrave here:
A federal judge will sentence R. Kelly for his Chicago convictions of child pornography and enticement of minors for sex on Thursday (Feb. 23), when the 56-year-old singer will learn if he must spend the rest of his life behind bars or if he will have some hope of getting out.
The central question for the judge at the hearing in Kelly’s hometown of Chicago is whether to heed prosecutors’ request to order that Kelly serve a new sentence only after he completes his 30-year term imposed last year in New York for racketeering and sex trafficking.
A sentence that Kelly must serve consecutively would be tantamount to a life sentence.
Prosecutors acknowledge that a lengthy term served after the New York sentence would practically erase any chance of Kelly ever leaving prison alive. They say the Grammy Award-winner’s crimes against children and his lack of remorse justified that.
They recommend a 25-year sentence served consecutively. That would make him eligible for release in 2066, a year shy of his 100th birthday. The defense wants a sentence of around 10 years, served simultaneously.
If the judge does let Kelly serve his new sentence simultaneously with the New York sentence, he will serve no more than the 30 years and should be eligible for release at around age 80 — providing him some hope of one day resuming life outside prison.
Jurors in Chicago convicted Kelly last year on six of 13 counts — three counts of producing child porn and three of enticement of minors for sex. Kelly was acquitted of the marquee count, alleging he successfully rigged his 2008 state child pornography trial.
Kelly rose from poverty in Chicago to become one of the world’s biggest R&B stars. Known for his smash hit “I Believe I Can Fly” and for sex-infused songs such as “Bump n’ Grind,” he sold millions of albums even after allegations about his abuse of girls began circulating publicly in the 1990s.
In presentencing filings, prosecutors described Kelly as “a serial sexual predator” who used his fame and wealth to reel in star-struck fans to sexually abuse and then discard them.
Kelly’s lawyer, Jennifer Bonjean, accused prosecutors of offering an “embellished narrative” regarding Kelly and seeking to get the judge to join what she called the government’s “blood-thirsty campaign to make Kelly a symbol of the #MeToo movement.”
Bonjean said Kelly has suffered enough, including financially. She said his worth once approached $1 billion, but that he “is now destitute.”
A new lawsuit claims that an antique car dealer crossed his heart and hoped to die when he promised Adam Levine a classic Maserati — but then fraudulently sold a different vehicle.
In a complaint filed Friday in Los Angeles federal court, attorneys for Adam Levine’s so-called living trust claim that dealer Rick Cole convinced the group to trade two classic Ferraris in return for what the dealer claimed was a rare 1971 Maserati Ghibli 4.9 Liter Spyder, one of only 25 such cars ever produced.
But the lawsuit says it later turned out that there are “serious questions” about whether the Maserati (valued at $850,000) is authentic — and that Cole took “active steps” to conceal the red flags.
“It is now readily apparent that Cole was well aware that the vehicle is not the actual [Maserati], and that the vehicle has a substantial cloud over its identity, authenticity, and provenance, crippling its market value to a figure far less than that paid by the trust,” lawyers for Levine’s entity wrote. “Cole egregiously never disclosed any of this to the trust, withholding this information in order to make substantial monies on the sale.”
Cole did not return multiple requests for comment in response to the lawsuit’s allegations. A spokeswoman for Levine also did not immediately return a request for comment; neither did a lawyer for the Adam Levine Living Trust — a type of legal entity that controls assets for individuals and the named plaintiff in the lawsuit.
Cole’s website says he’s spent decades as an “Auctioneer to the Stars,” claiming he’s sold more than 20,000 cars and worked with Frank Sinatra, Robin Williams, Sylvester Stallone and Jay Leno. Levine is listed on the site among the other A-listers.
According to Friday’s lawsuit, Levine’s trust agreed with Cole in early 2021 to swap a 1972 Ferrari and a 1968 Ferrari, valued at a combined $950,000, in return for the Maserati and $100,000 in cash. But the trust’s attorneys say that when the rare car was later put up for resale, it was revealed that an identical Maserati with the same vehicle identification number existed elsewhere.
The lawsuit says that a deeper investigation then revealed big red flags, including that the disputed Maserati had been withdrawn from a 2015 auction over serious concerns about its authenticity, including incorrectly stamped markings on the chassis. And the trust’s lawyers say they believe that Cole subsequently tried to fix those defects, though he still left “giveaways” that the car was not authentic.
“This demonstrates that, after the questioning of the authenticity of the vehicle at [the 2015 auction], someone tried to make the vehicle appear authentic by reproducing or stamping a new chassis plate to make the writing seem more like that used by Maserati at the time, in an obvious attempt to convince a potential buyer,” the trust’s lawyers wrote. “Upon information and belief, it was Cole and/or his agents who made these changes.”
The lawsuit also claims that Cole “repeatedly discouraged” the resale of the case, since he “obviously feared that if the Trust marketed the Vehicle, it would eventually learn the truth concerning its lack of authenticity and corresponding decrease in market value.”
In technical terms, the trust is suing Cole for various forms of misrepresentation, breach of contract, and fraudulent concealment; it’s seeking a court order rescinding the sale of the vehicle, or an award of damages of at least $850,000.
A man convicted of gunning down rapper Nipsey Hussle in 2019 is likely to get life in prison when he is sentenced Wednesday (Feb. 22) in a Los Angeles courtroom.
Jurors in July found Eric R. Holder Jr., 32, guilty of the first-degree murder of the 33-year-old Grammy-nominated hip-hop artist outside the clothing store Hussle founded, the Marathon, in the South Los Angeles neighborhood where both men grew up.
Holder was also convicted of two counts of attempted voluntary manslaughter and two counts of assault with a firearm for gunfire that hit two other men at the scene who survived.
The sentencing has been delayed in part so defense attorney Aaron Jansen could move for Superior Court Judge H. Clay Jacke to reduce Holder’s conviction to manslaughter or second-degree murder, which the judge rejected in December.
Jacke will have a broad range of possibilities when he sentences Holder at the Thursday morning hearing, but the murder conviction alone carries a term of 25 years to life. The other convictions, and special sentencing circumstances that jurors found true, make it almost certain Holder will spend the rest of his life in prison. Holder was not eligible for the death penalty.
“We hope that there is some resounding peace in the fact that his killer will be in prison likely for the rest of his life,” the lead prosecutor, Deputy District Attorney John McKinney, said after the verdict.
Actor Lauren London, who was Hussle’s partner and the mother of his two young children, did not attend any part of the trial, nor did any of his relatives, and none are expected to give victim impact statements, as often happens at such hearings.
The evidence against Holder was so overwhelming — from eyewitnesses to surveillance cameras from local businesses that captured his arrival, the shooting and his departure — that his attorney conceded during trial that he had shot Hussle.
But Jansen argued to jurors that the heated circumstances of the shooting meant a lesser verdict of voluntary manslaughter was merited. The jury returned with the first-degree murder verdict after about six hours of deliberations. Jansen said afterward that he was “deeply disappointed” in the verdict, which they planned to appeal.
He did manage a minor victory for Holder by securing the attempted voluntary manslaughter convictions where prosecutors had sought attempted murder verdicts. The sentencing, originally scheduled for September but postponed at the request of the defense, brings an end to a legal saga that lasted more than three years and a trial that was often delayed because of the pandemic.
Hussle, whose legal name is Ermias Asghedom, and Holder had known each other for years growing up as members of the Rollin’ 60s in South LA. Both were aspiring rappers. But Holder never found the same success as Hussle, who would become a local hero and a national celebrity.
A chance meeting outside the Marathon, in a shopping center Hussle owned, led to a conversation the two men had about rumors that Holder had been acting as an informant for authorities. Jansen argued that being publicly accused of being a “snitch” by a person as prominent as Hussle brought on a “heat of passion” in Holder that prompted the shooting.
A woman who was with Holder that day took a photo with Hussle before becoming Holder’s unwitting getaway driver, was a key witness for the prosecution.
After years of devoted work that won him underground acclaim — his nickname was both a play on the name of comedian Nipsey Russell and a nod to the hustle the future hip-hop star showed in making music and selling CDs — Hussle had just released his major-label debut album and earned his first Grammy nomination when he was killed.
A year after his death, he was mourned at a memorial at the arena then known as Staples Center, and celebrated in a performance at the Grammy Awards that included DJ Khaled and John Legend.
After nearly four years, late rapper Lil Peep’s mother, Liza Womack, has reached a settlement in the wrongful death lawsuit she brought against her son’s former label and management company, First Access Entertainment (FAE), according to court documents obtained by Billboard.
On Friday (Feb. 17), Womak — who is also the administrator of Peep’s estate — filed a notice in Los Angeles court that she had settled the case against all defendants. Details of the settlement agreement were not made available.
In addition to FAE, the 2019 lawsuit targeted Bryant Ortega, a member of Peep’s management team, and Belinda Mercer, Peep’s tour manager for his final tour in 2017, alleging they were responsible for the rapper’s fatal overdose of Xanax and fentanyl in November that year. Among other claims, Womack alleged that Mercer had a sexual relationship with Peep — born Gustav Elijah Åhr — and that she provided him drugs including ketamine. Rather than seek help for Lil Peep, FAE CEO Sarah Stennett was also accused of gifting the emerging rapper a bottle of pills during a group dinner.
The lawsuit further alleged that during a Los Angeles tour stop in 2017, Peep was “barely able to communicate, let alone perform, due to his use of drugs,” but that his managers still allowed him to take the stage. Womack also claimed the rapper wanted to quit the tour on different occasions, but that his team neglected his pleas and “pushed [Peep] onto stage after stage in city after city, plying and propping” him up with drugs. The suit additionally alleged negligence and breach of contract.
In February 2022, Judge Teresa Beaudet ruled that the case against FAE and Mercer could go on, though she dismissed the wrongful death claim as well as two out of four negligence claims against Ortega. FAE, Mercer and Ortega have all denied the allegations, with FAE previously calling the lawsuit “groundless and offensive.”
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: Eminem moves to block two Real Housewives from registering a “Shady” trademark, Drake’s deposition drama continues, Damon Dash wins a verdict clearing him of sexual assault, and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Eminem Says He’s (Legally) The Real “Slim Shady”
If your 2023 bingo card had Eminem picking a legal fight with a pair of Real Housewives, I have some great news for you.
The rapper’s lawyers filed a case at the U.S. trademark office last week aimed at blocking Gizelle Bryant and Robyn Dixon (stars of The Real Housewives of Potomac) from securing a federal trademark registration on “Reasonably Shady,” the name of their hit podcast.
As you probably guessed, Eminem’s attorneys were concerned about the similarity of the name to “Slim Shady” — a nickname the rapper has used for decades for a dark, violent alter ego. Given the overlap, they said consumers might be tricked into thinking Eminem was somehow involved with the podcast.
“Confusion is unavoidable,” the rapper’s lawyers wrote. “Applicant’s mark ‘Reasonably Shady’ simply looks and sounds like ‘Shady’ and suggests that it represents the services of Mathers.”
For a full breakdown of Eminem’s case — including all the actual legal documents and a response from Bryant and Dixon’s lawyer — go read our entire story here.
Other top stories this week…
DRAKE DEPOSITION SAGA CONTINUES – A Florida judge reversed himself and ruled that Drake wouldn’t need to sit for a deposition over the murder of XXXtentacion, seemingly swayed by the star’s arguments that he has no connection to the case. But the fight isn’t over quite yet, as defense attorneys are still pushing for a sit-down. Stay tuned…
CONDÉ SETTLES FAKE VOGUE SUIT – In other Drake developments, Condé Nast reached a settlement to end a lawsuit against the rapper and 21 Savage over their use of a fake Vogue magazine cover to promote their album Her Loss. The agreement included a permanent injunction barring any further use of the publisher’s trademarks as well as an undisclosed monetary payment.
DAME DASH TRIAL VERDICT – A jury mostly cleared Damon Dash in a case accusing the Roc-A-Fella Records co-founder of sexually assaulting a photographer. Following a four-day trial, the jurors found that Dash defamed Monique Bunn when he accused her of theft, but that he had not inappropriately touched her while she was sleeping at his house during a video project. Jurors awarded Bunn $30,000 in damages — far less than the $150 million she had sought.
R. KELLY CAN’T GET NEW TRIAL – A Chicago federal judge rejected R. Kelly’s bid to overturn his conviction last year on child pornography charges. Denying a motion for a new trial or acquittal, the judge ruled that prosecutors provided jurors with “enough evidence to sustain a guilty verdict on all six counts Kelly was convicted of.” Sentencing on those charges is set for Thursday (Feb. 23).
UTOPIA ACCUSED OF BAILING ON DEAL – Utopia Music was hit with a lawsuit claiming the buzzy music startup reneged on a $26.5 million deal to buy a U.S. music tech company called SourceAudio — and now owes more than $37 million because of the year-long delay. Switzerland-based Utopia had been on a buying spree over the past two years but announced in November that it would lay off 20% of its staff.
