State Champ Radio

by DJ Frosty

Current track

Title

Artist

Current show
blank

State Champ Radio Mix

8:00 pm 12:00 am

Current show
blank

State Champ Radio Mix

8:00 pm 12:00 am


Legal News

Page: 19

Michael Jackson’s estate has won a tentative court ruling that would allow it to proceed with a $600 million sale of the singer’s catalog to Sony Music, overcoming objections from his mother that aimed to block the deal.
Katherine Jackson had argued that the gargantuan deal violated the terms of Michael’s will, but a California appeals court tentatively ruled Wednesday (July 17) that she had “forfeited” that argument by failing to make it before a lower probate court.

Even if she had properly raised that argument, the appeals court said the estate’s executors had the power to make the deal. The court said Jackson’s will had vested the executors (John Branca and John McClain) with the authority to “sell, invest, or otherwise manage estate property” while they were in charge.

Trending on Billboard

“The court is tentatively inclined to affirm the probate court’s order granting the executors’ request to proceed with the proposed transaction,” the appeals court wrote in its ruling, obtained by Billboard. “We tentatively conclude that Katherine’s challenge fails on the merits because the probate court’s order does not violate the terms of Michael’s will.”

Such “tentative” rulings must be finalized before they are formally entered, but they strongly indicate the way the court is planning to rule. An attorney for Katherine did not return a request for comment on Thursday. A rep for the Jackson estate declined to comment. News of the tentative ruling was first reported by Rolling Stone.

As reported by Billboard earlier this year, the Jackson estate and Sony Music have reached a deal that will see the music giant buy half of the singer’s publishing and recorded masters catalog for more than $600 million.

But because the Jackson estate is still pending before a Los Angeles probate court more than 15 years after his 2009 death, his executors took the then-confidential deal to Judge Mitchell Beckloff for approval. When they did so, Katherine filed objections — among them that the sale “violated Michael’s wishes” and that the catalog would likely continue to gain value over time if retained.

In April 2023, Beckloff rejected those objections and ruled that the deal could move forward. Katherine then filed an appeal, resulting in Wednesday’s tentative decision.

The wrangling over the Sony deal has exposed rifts among Jackson’s heirs. In March, Jackson’s son Blanket asked the judge to stop his grandmother from using estate money to fund her efforts to block the Sony deal. Though both had initially opposed the sale, Blanket and Jackson’s other children accepted the probate judge’s decision allowing it to move forward.

Later that same week, the estate responded to claims from Katherine’s attorneys that she needed estate money to pay for her legal battle, arguing she had received more than $55 million since the singer’s death. The estate’s executors argued that “virtually no request of Mrs. Jackson for her care or maintenance has been declined,” including more than $33 million in cash.

As detailed in a Billboard feature profile this week, entertainment attorney John Branca represents many of pop music’s biggest legacy artists — most famously, the Michael Jackson estate, of which he is co-executor. But Branca is no lone wolf. His partners in the music department at Ziffren Brittenham — David Byrnes, David Lande, Mitch Tenzer and Kelly Vallon — make up, he says, “the most important contemporary music practice of any law firm in the world.” Certainly, along with Grubman Shire Meiselas & Sacks, and Taylor Swift attorney Donald S. Passman’s firm, Gang Tyre Ramer, it is one of the premier law firms for the music industry.
Lande primarily represents Selena Gomez, Pharrell Williams, SZA, Olivia Rodrigo, Rosalía and Justin Timberlake (when asked if Timberlake called him after his recent DUI arrest, Lande answers, “No, I called him”), and Byrnes’ principal clients include Travis Scott, Kelly Clarkson, Blake Shelton and the estates of Kurt Cobain, Mac Miller, Tom Petty and Eazy-E — hardly even an exhaustive list of their or the firm’s clients. But the partners all work collaboratively to serve the firm’s clientele, which also includes industry executives.

Trending on Billboard

For example, Byrnes and Lande represent Beyoncé as a team. Lande — who served as a tour manager and tour accountant for such artists as Elton John and Madonna during breaks from his undergraduate and law school years — says he was involved in every aspect of the 2023 Renaissance world tour, “from making the initial deal with Live Nation, reviewing all of the business plans, working with her and her team on what that business would look like as a tour, to ultimately its execution.” Byrnes, who worked on the MTV show I.R.S. Records Presents: The Cutting Edge and as an editor at the now-defunct music trade publication Cashbox, consulted with the firm’s film/TV department to negotiate deals for Beyoncé’s 2019 and 2020 films, Homecoming and Black Is King, respectively. Tenzer and Vallon work on many clients.

Given the depth and breadth of their music industry experience, legal and otherwise — Tenzer was director of business affairs at Sony Music, and Vallon’s résumé includes roles at CAA, AEG, several labels and The Colbert Report, for example — “We have really good market knowledge of what’s cutting edge and what’s achievable, and we all end up being business advisers to our clients — helping them think through deal structure and the kinds of deals they ought to do,” Lande says.

With more artists preferring independence over label deals and labels holding off on signing acts until they build a significant fan base, the deals before the firm’s music department have evolved significantly. “There’s a plethora of independent distributors and labels out there offering development-type deals, and we’re dealing with those every day,” Byrnes says.

And Lande explains that artists are now more interested in building long-term value through equity. “Years ago, it was just, ‘Pay me this amount of money and I will endorse your product or service,’ ” he says. Those deals still happen, but “more and more, our clients are entering joint ventures, funding things themselves and building businesses that capitalize on their celebrity in an organic way. They take more risk by doing that, and it takes a longer time to build value,” he continues. “But the ultimate payoff is significant.”

This story will appear in the July 20, 2024, issue of Billboard.

John Branca stopped collecting his clients’ RIAA gold and platinum record awards decades ago. Those he has that are not in storage or at his office — approximately 20 — are displayed, along with other music memorabilia, in four rooms of his Italian villa-style home in affluent Beverly Park, a gated community in the Los Angeles hills. The records are etched with some of the most recognizable names and album titles in pop and rock history: the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack, Fleetwood Mac’s Rumours, Santana’s Supernatural, The Best of The Doors and others from Elton John, Nirvana, Backstreet Boys, Usher, Alanis Morissette, Enrique Iglesias and Michael Jackson.
A partner and the head of the music department at L.A. entertainment law firm Ziffren Brittenham, Branca has represented 30 Rock & Roll Hall of Fame inductees over his 47 years as an entertainment lawyer. But he’s most closely associated with Jackson, especially since the pop legend’s untimely death at the age of 50 on June 25, 2009, brought on by a heart-stopping mixture of sedatives and the anesthetic propofol.

Trending on Billboard

Branca, who had represented Jackson on and off since 1980, had rejoined the pop star’s team just eight days earlier, six years after Jackson had terminated Branca’s services in a letter that offered no explanation for his decision. On July 1, he was appointed co-executor of his estate with former record executive John McClain, based on a 2002 will that Branca produced for the court. Jackson left everything to his children (Prince, Paris and Bigi); his mother, Katherine Jackson; and charity, but his estate was almost $500 million in debt.

Now 73, Branca was just 29 and working for then-prominent entertainment attorney David Braun when Jackson — who was seeking independence both from his family (including his notorious manager father, Joe Jackson) and as an artist — hired the young attorney. The two grew close: Jackson was best man at Branca’s first wedding, which Little Richard officiated, and until their parting, Branca was instrumental in helping Jackson become an artist who, at his apogee, was the Taylor Swift of his time. But Branca sees it differently. “I prefer to say she’s the Michael Jackson of this time,” he says with a wry smile, sitting in the so-called “tennis house” next to his personal court. “If there was a Mount Rushmore of pop artists,” he adds, “you’d have Elvis, The Beatles and Michael.”

Fifteen years after Jackson’s death, Branca remains an effective steward of his estate. In addition to adding approximately $3 billion in net revenue to its coffers through publishing acquisitions and negotiating better terms for Jackson’s catalog including ownership of his master recordings, among others, he has maintained the late artist’s cultural relevance through a number of theatrical productions, documentaries and, next year, a biopic — all of which have kept Jackson’s brand from being defined by T-shirts and coffee mugs while maintaining focus on his art instead of the allegations of sexual abuse that surfaced late in his life and followed him after death.

Branca also remains a fierce defender of Jackson’s crown as the King of Pop. He professes immense admiration for Swift’s accomplishments, including her blockbuster 2023 concert film, Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour, but he refutes media reports from earlier this year asserting that its box-office yields had surpassed those of the posthumous 2009 Jackson documentary, This Is It, saying inflation wasn’t taken into account. According to Box Office Mojo, The Eras Tour grossed $261.7 million and This Is It grossed $268 million — or, in 2024 dollars, roughly $267 million for the former and $390 million for the latter.

Then there’s the May New York Times story that compared Swift to Jackson, The Beatles and other artists, pointing out that the 10 solo albums Jackson released between 1972 and 2001 have been RIAA-certified platinum 72 times, with Thriller accounting for 34 of them (making it one of the most successful albums of all time). Swift currently has 50 certified platinum albums — although the Times article reported that her sales indicate the number will be closer to 90 once her “Taylor’s Version” releases are counted. But Branca says Jackson’s certifications do not account for his popularity overseas. “Two-thirds of Michael’s sales are outside the United States,” he notes — sales that the RIAA does not count when issuing gold and platinum albums. That international appeal has carried over to the streaming era: Jackson’s combined U.S. streams for 2020 through 2022 made up 28% of his combined global streams, according to Luminate. He also points out that multiple streams of a single song can count as an album, which was not the case when physical sales were the only measurement of a record’s success.

Branca is a walking, talking compendium of numbers and reasons that Jackson belongs on that pop Rushmore, and preaches that gospel to his 29,200 followers on TikTok, where he has posted 70 videos — the majority of them about Jackson, among others about Branca’s own memorabilia and business philosophies.

But regarding the estate’s business dealings and litigation, he is a tomb.

When questions veer into that territory, his response is usually a version of “This isn’t going to be another story about the Jackson estate, is it?” He has a point. In addition to the RIAA awards on his wall, over his career Branca has represented Bob Dylan, George Harrison, Neil Diamond, The Beach Boys and Brian Wilson, Paul McCartney and John Lennon’s Northern Songs publishing catalog, the Elvis Presley estate, The Rolling Stones, Earth, Wind & Fire and Motown founder Berry Gordy.

The son of an actress-dancer who appeared in a number of Elvis’ films and an athletic commissioner for New York State, Branca grew up in the New York suburb of Mount Vernon and moved to Los Angeles at age 11. In his teens, he played guitar and keyboards in two rock bands, The Other Half and The Pasternak Progress. “I signed a record deal at 16, but I was forced to go to college by my mother,” he says.

Christopher Patey

Today, Branca still projects a Beverly Hills version of that youthful rock’n’roll aesthetic. His car collection includes two Rolls-Royces (a white 2023 Cullinan and a blue 2016 Dawn). He sold the Ferrari 458 Spider that he once told Billboard he would hang “from the ceiling in my living room if I could” — and he has turned heads at Grammy parties with a beautiful woman in tow. (Married three times, Branca is currently single.)

But that exterior flash conceals “an incredible strategist,” says David Lande, a Ziffren Brittenham partner who also represents music clients. As such, Branca declines to discuss pressing questions regarding the estate, including Katherine Jackson’s appeal of a judge’s 2023 ruling that let the estate move forward with its then-confidential $625 million sale of 50% of Jackson’s assets to Sony Music. (California’s Second Appellate District Court in Los Angeles has since issued a tentative ruling that sides with the estate.) 

He also deflects queries about the role that co-executor McClain plays in estate administration. A former executive at A&M Records and Interscope, and a key figure in Janet Jackson’s success, McClain has A&R’d all posthumous releases of Jackson’s music, but he has otherwise been virtually invisible since Jackson’s will was probated, in part due to health issues. Branca only says: “For all his genius, John shuns the spotlight.”

The Sony assets sale is off-limits as well — but according to three sources familiar with the deal, the estate retained Jackson’s public image and likeness rights, which means that Sony does not get a cut of projects such as the various productions of MJ: The Musical and the biopic that is slated to open in April 2025. (Actor Miles Teller will portray Branca.)

Those sources also tell Billboard that the estate retains control and management of how the assets Sony acquired can be used moving forward. Branca says only that the sale will not change the business strategy that Jackson mandated when he was alive: “Everything has to be authentic and true to the artist.”

The deal values Jackson’s assets at $1.25 billion — the highest of any artist in history, including the recent $1 billion to $1.2 billion valuation assigned to Queen’s coveted assets (which Sony is reported to be buying). Unlike the Jackson deal, sources say the Queen sale includes name, image and likeness rights.

The $3 billion that the estate has earned includes its take from box-office receipts from several Jackson-themed theatrical productions, which Branca says have grossed close to $2 billion, among them two Cirque du Soleil shows; The Immortal World Tour, which ran from 2011 to 2014 and grossed $360 million, according to Billboard Boxscore; and Michael Jackson: One, which has been playing at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas since 2013. On Broadway, MJ: The Musical has grossed over $202.5 million and attracted almost 1.4 million theatergoers since opening in February 2022, according to The Broadway League. The jukebox musical opened on London’s West End in March; will debut in Hamburg, Germany, in November; has toured North America since August 2023; and Branca says a fifth production will debut at the Sydney Opera House next February and tour the world. The U.S. touring version, he adds, “outgrosses the Broadway show.”

The recent success of the musical and anticipation of the biopic, Michael, which stars Jermaine Jackson’s son Jaafar Jackson in the title role, have deflected the spotlight from the disturbing allegations revealed in the 2019 HBO docuseries Leaving Neverland, in which two men accused Jackson of sexually abusing them as children. (The case is currently in arbitration; Branca declines to comment on the film or the estate’s lawsuit against HBO over it.)

Branca does allude to the documentary when discussing his perspective on the use of artificial intelligence in the music industry. “AI is a tool if it’s used properly, and from what I’ve seen, it will never replace the emotional attachment that a fan has to the real artist,” he says. But he also contends, “It’s important to have a regulatory environment where artists can control their [intellectual property] and their brand.” And that control, he asserts, should extend beyond their lives.

“Libel laws only extend to a living artist. Once they pass away, anybody can say anything, and in my opinion, that’s reckless and not fair,” he says. “There should be legislation that protects an artist’s reputation and brand for a period after their death — whether it’s 10 years or 20 years. You can still say things that are truthful, but you can’t make stuff up.”

It’s an idea that would have a profound effect on journalism and media, and Branca has taken steps to make it reality. “We’ve talked to the legislature in Vermont, which is very progressive, about a pilot program for protection of the deceased,” he says. “It’s been put in front of certain legislators who are interested in it, but it’s embryonic at this point.”

Over the course of his career, Branca says he’s proudest of “fighting for artists’ rights,” a mission that extends far beyond his work for the Jackson estate. “I got the Bee Gees the ownership of their recordings from [Australian music impresario Robert] Stigwood. I got Don Henley back the ownership of his Eagles songs,” he says. For The Rolling Stones’ Steel Wheels tour, “I negotiated the touring structure in which there was a single national tour promoter who guaranteed not only ticket sales, merchandising and all other rights in one bundle” — a then-game-changing deal that is now standard practice for major artists — “and brought them and their catalog to Richard Branson to establish Virgin Records.” He extracted Carlos Santana from his Island Records contract and reunited him with Clive Davis, which resulted in the smash success of Supernatural and, for John Fogerty, obtained artist royalties for the first time on his Creedence Clearwater Revival recordings.

Branca attributes this conviction to growing up in the late ’60s “during the anti-Vietnam, anti-establishment era.” That said, righteousness runs in his family. His uncle, Ralph Branca, was a three-time MLB All-Star who played for the Brooklyn Dodgers in the ’40s and ’50s. To sports fans, he is the pitcher who gave up the “Shot Heard Round the World” — New York Giant Bobby Thomson’s walk-off home run that won the National League pennant for his team in 1951. But Ralph also ranks as a hero in the history of civil rights as the white team member who befriended MLB’s first Black player, Jackie Robinson.

“Ralph embraced Jackie,” says Della Britton, president/CEO of the Jackie Robinson Foundation. On opening day of the 1947 season, when Robinson made his MLB debut, Ralph lined up next to him when other players refused. “John’s father [John R. Branca; the son is John G.] said to Ralph, ‘Are you crazy?’ ” Britton explains. “At the time, Jackie was receiving death threats, and Ralph’s brother was worried that someone would take a shot at him, and if they missed, hit Ralph.” Ralph’s reply? Britton says: “ ‘I would have died a hero.’ ”

In the tennis house, where his uncle’s Dodgers uniform hangs framed on the wall, Branca wipes away tears as he talks about his uncle and his father, who was a high school pitcher. “He threw two no-hitters and was the New York State player of the year, but he got drafted in World War II,” he says. “I read Ralph’s autobiography, and he said that the [MLB] clubs overlooked my father because he was 5 foot 10 or 11 inches and he didn’t throw 95 [mph] like Ralph. But he said, ‘Today, Johnny would be looked at like Greg Maddux: control, control, control.’ ”

Like his late uncle, Branca serves on the board of the Jackie Robinson Foundation. Dylan, the youngest of his three children, is a pitcher on New York University’s baseball team, and Branca funded an indoor practice facility in downtown Manhattan so that the players did not have to take the ferry to Staten Island. He also funded the Branca Family Field at the University of California, Los Angeles’ Jackie Robinson Stadium. (Branca got his law degree at UCLA and is a donor and board member of various schools there.)

His most recent philanthropic effort is tied to music. In June, he announced a $5 million gift to establish the John Branca Institute of Music at his undergraduate alma mater, L.A.’s Occidental College. His contribution will support the expansion of the college’s music program — one of Billboard’s top music business schools for the past several years.

The gift came with Branca’s caveat that the institute must “focus on contemporary music. I said, ‘Go back as far as you need to go back, but you must include the rock era — you know, Muddy Waters and Elvis through to what’s going on today,’ ” he says. “They’re going to do a class on the creation of a song and how it’s marketed. They’re going to come at it from a more liberal arts perspective, so somebody majoring in economics or philosophy can benefit and get a real knowledge of the music business. They may teach a class on Taylor Swift. They may teach a class on Michael Jackson, which would be pretty cool.”

And while he may not want to be known solely for his work with Jackson, Branca isn’t looking to put the man in the rearview mirror. Asked if he would have considered selling 100% of the estate’s assets to Sony, he shakes his head. “No,” he says. “I feel it’s important to pass Michael’s legacy on to his kids. So owning his name and likeness; always having 50% of the catalog and management control; the personal property: the warehouses, his Rolls-Royces, his chess set — everything goes to the kids. That’s how it should be.” 

Additional reporting by Ed Christman.

This story will appear in the July 20, 2024, issue of Billboard.

Attorneys for Live Nation want the judge presiding over the company’s historic antitrust case to dismiss the Department of Justice’s allegations that the concert promoter uses illegal tying arrangements to operate its amphitheaters, arguing it has no obligation to allow rival promoters to use the venues it owns or manages. 
Live Nation’s co-lead trial counsel Alfred C. Pfeiffer of Latham Watkins argued in a July 17 letter to Judge Arun Subramanian that this practice, described as a “refusal to deal,” is common in the concert business and protected by Supreme Court precedent.

“As a general matter, the Sherman Act does not restrict the long recognized right of a [defendant] engaged in an entirely private business, freely to exercise his own independent discretion as to parties with whom he will deal,” Pfeiffer writes, quoting a 2004 ruling in a case brought by Verizon.

Trending on Billboard

Accordingly, Live Nation has no obligation “to extend a helping hand to new entrants” or help its rivals “survive or expand,” Pfeiffer notes, adding, “the unimpeachable freedom to refuse to deal with rivals (in all but the rarest circumstances, which are not even arguably present in this case) rests on bedrock antitrust principles.” 

In the government’s 128-page complaint against Live Nation, attorneys with the DOJ’s antitrust division allege that Live Nation illegally “conditions artists’ access” to the 56 outdoor amphitheaters the company controls by forcing artists to chose “Live Nation as the promoter for concerts at its venues.”

Pfeiffer’s letter was born out of a June 27 pre-trial hearing in which Judge Subramanian invited Live Nation’s attorneys to file a letter to the court identifying issues that Live Nation had with the DOJ complaint “as opposed to advancing those arguments after” an amended complaint is filed,” Pfeiffer wrote. “Your Honor advised that doing so would provide Defendants ‘a good argument that those claims should be dismissed with prejudice’” if the government cannot overcome Live Nation’s arguments on a motion to dismiss.  

Live Nation lawyers also want the antitrust claims filed by 30 states’ attorneys general alongside the DOJ dismissed, including 22 separate claims under their own state laws. 

“These claims are threadbare and conclusory” Pfeiffer writes, noting that many of the state AGs merely repeat the DOJ’s allegations without specifically alleging “the elements of each state-law claim” or citing “what conduct allegedly violates the state laws in question.” 

Pfeiffer also criticized the states for failing to detail their damage claims and argued that many of the state objections were barred by different state’s statute of limitations.

The DOJ has until Sept. 18 to respond to Live Nation’s letter.

Soulja Boy is suing social media personalities Tasha K and William The Baddest for defamation after they allegedly made false statements about the rapper having a sexual encounter with a man.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Los Angeles court, Soulja Boy (DeAndre Cortez Way) cited a May interview on Tasha K’s celebrity gossip podcast in which William allegedly recounted explicit details of a supposed tryst he’d had with the “Crank That” rapper.

Soulja Boy’s lawyers say these statements were false and have brought “embarrassment and disgrace that can cause fans to abandon and withdraw from supporting him.”

Trending on Billboard

“Plaintiff has suffered actual reputational and professional harm as a result of defendants maliciously targeting plaintiff and seeking to sabotage his careers, redefining his character as a man who is not straight, a fraud and dishonest person in the entertainment industry, as a public figure, which is not true,” the rapper’s lawyers write.

It’s not the first time Tasha K (Latasha Kebe) has been accused of defaming someone on “UnWine With TashaK.” Back in 2022, Cardi B won a nearly $4 million defamation verdict against her over salacious statements about drug use, STDs and prostitution. Tasha has since tried to use Chapter 11 bankruptcy to avoid paying most of that judgment, but a judge rejected that effort last year.

In the new case, Soulja Boy’s attorneys are challenging statements made during a “tell-all interview” on May 16, in which William (William Thomas) recounted an “alleged intimate moment” with the rapper.

According to quotes from the lawsuit, William said: “So I walked over there, I get on my knee, he’s sitting on the edge of his bed. I started giving him oral, it’s a big thang and it grew, you know to the left.” The video itself no longer appears to be available on Tasha’s YouTube channel and could not be reviewed by Billboard.

After the interview went public, Soulja Boy says William has been “harassing and tormenting” him on social media, including an X post featuring a “defaming and embarrassing sexual photoshopped picture” that purports to depict himself with the rapper. William’s post allegedly urged his followers to click through to a page on OnlyFans – a site frequently used to share sexually-explicit imagery.

“Although the publications may be deleted, plaintiff will forever be damaged by the publications never being removed from the web,” the rapper’s lawyers write.

Days after the interview was first published, attorneys for Soulja Boy say they sent a cease and desist letter to Tasha and William demanding that they delete the “false, malicious and are completely outrageous” statements. The letter warned that they had “already engaged in tortious acts that entitle Mr. Way to monetary damages” and that if they did not stop, “your liability for such monetary damages will increase.”

Neither William nor an attorney for Tasha K immediately returned requests for comment on Thursday.

Ye (formerly Kanye West) is facing another lawsuit accusing him of illegal sampling, this time over allegations that he incorporated an instrumental track into two songs from Donda even after he was explicitly denied permission.
The case, filed Wednesday (July 17) in Los Angeles federal court, claims that Ye borrowed elements from a song called “MSD PT2” for his own “Hurricane” and “Moon” — both of which reached the top 20 on the Hot 100 when they were released in 2021.

Filed by a company that owns the rights to the earlier song, the case claims that when Ye was refused a license to use it, he simply “decided to steal it.”

Trending on Billboard

“This lawsuit is about more than defendants’ failure to pay a fee,” writes Oren Warshavsky and other attorneys from the law firm BakerHostetler, representing the plaintiffs. “It is about the rights of artists, musicians, and songwriters to determine how their works are published and used. Intellectual property owners have a right to decide how their property is exploited and need to be able to prevent shameless infringers from simply stealing.”

In an act of particularly “blatant brazenness,” the lawsuit claims that Ye even credited the song’s four creators — Khalil Abdul-Rahman Hazzard, Sam Barsh, Dan Seeff and Josh Mease — as songwriters despite their refusal to work with him.

Wednesday’s case was filed not by the artists themselves, but by a company called Artist Revenue Advocates (ARA), which owns the copyrights to “MSD PT2.” Lawyers for the company say the four artists turned to ARA after they “unsuccessfully attempted to collect their share of the proceeds from these songs” for nearly three years.

A spokesperson for Ye could not immediately be located for comment on the new case.

The new allegations come less than a month after Ye settled a separate lawsuit filed by the estate of Donna Summer over a very similar accusation. In that earlier case, Summer’s estate claimed the rapper had used her 1977 hit “I Feel Love” in his own “Good (Don’t Die)” despite a similarly explicit refusal.

“Summer’s estate … wanted no association with West’s controversial history and specifically rejected West’s proposed use,” the estate’s attorneys wrote at the time. “In the face of this rejection, defendants arrogantly and unilaterally decided they would simply steal ‘I Feel Love’ and use it without permission.”   

Even before the two recent cases, Ye has been sued repeatedly for uncleared samples and interpolations in his music.

In 2022, Ye was hit with a lawsuit claiming his song “Life of the Party” illegally sampled a song by the pioneering rap group Boogie Down Productions; accused in another case over allegations that he used an uncleared snippet of Marshall Jefferson’s 1986 house track “Move Your Body” in the song “Flowers”; and sued in a different case by a Texas pastor for allegedly sampling from his recorded sermon in “Come to Life.”

Before that, West and Pusha T were sued in 2019 for sampling George Jackson‘s “I Can’t Do Without You” on the track “Come Back Baby.” That same year, he was sued for allegedly using an audio snippet of a young girl praying in his 2016 song “Ultralight Beam.” Further back, West was hit with similar cases over allegedly unlicensed samples used in “New Slaves,” “Bound 2” and “My Joy.”

Young Thug’s sprawling Atlanta gang trial is once again in need of a new judge.
Just two days after Judge Ural Glanville was ordered removed from the Young Slime Life RICO case, his replacement on the trial bench – Judge Shakura L. Ingram – said Wednesday that she would also recuse herself.

In doing so, Ingram cited her connection with Akeiba Stanley, a Fulton County courthouse deputy who was arrested last year for allegedly attempting to smuggle in contraband to another YSL defendant with whom prosecutors claim Stanley was having an “inappropriate relationship.”

Wednesday’s recusal order said that Stanley had previously a deputy assigned to Ingram’s courtroom.

“Because this court’s former assigned deputy could be called as a witness in any future proceedings in this case, the court may be called upon to assess this deputy’s credibility, or rule on matters related to her criminal prosecution,” Ingram wrote. “This may undermine the public’s confidence in the impartiality of the proceedings.”

Trending on Billboard

The judge stressed that she was not actually biased toward Stanley, but that she must avoid any “appearance of impropriety” in the proceedings: “The clerk of this court is directed to reassign this criminal action to another judge.”

It was not immediately clear who would replace Ingram, or how her recusal would impact the YSL case, which has already been pending for more than two years. The trial, which started in January 2023 but has faced numerous delays and disruptions, was already expected to run well into 2025. All the while, Young Thug has sat in jail, repeatedly denied bond over concerns that he might intimidate witnesses.

Thug (Jeffery Williams) and dozens of others were indicted in May 2022 over allegations that his “YSL” was not really a record label called “Young Stoner Life” but rather a violent Atlanta gang called “Young Slime Life.” Citing Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) law, prosecutors claim the group operated a criminal enterprise that committed murders, carjackings, armed robberies, drug dealing and other crimes over the course of a decade.

Glanville, the chief judge of Fulton County Superior Court, had been presiding over the massive case from the start. But a month ago, it was revealed that the judge had taken part in a secret “ex parte” meeting with prosecutors and a key witness. Attorneys for Thug and other defendants alleged that Glanville had aided prosecutors in coercing the witness to testify and that the meeting had violated their constitutional rights to a fair trial.

On Monday, Judge Rachel Krause ruled that Glanville should be removed from the case over those complaints. Though Krause defended her fellow jurist’s conduct and said she had “no doubt” that Glanville could still fairly handle the case, Krause ordered him to step aside for the sake of “preserving the public’s confidence in the judicial system.”

The ruling is likely to further delay the YSL trial, which already saw an unprecedented 10-month jury selection process. Prosecutors have been presenting witness testimony for months, but have listed hundreds of potential witnesses that they might call.

When a permanent new judge is put into place, he or she will likely face demands for a mistrial by defense attorneys over Glanville’s conduct, as well as renewed requests for Thug and the other defendants to be released on bond until a verdict is reached.

Snoop Dogg is facing a copyright lawsuit that claims the legendary rapper has refused to pay a veteran studio musician after using two of his backing tracks – a case that cites an earlier battle between Tracy Chapman and Nicki Minaj.
The lawsuit, filed Monday in Los Angeles federal court, was lodged by Trevor Lawrence Jr., a well-known producer and drummer who has been credited on songs by Bruno Mars, Alicia Keys, Ed Sheeran, Mariah Carey and other top artists.

Lawrence claims that he created two backing tracks “on spec” and allowed Snoop (Calvin Broadus) to “experiment with the tracks in-studio,” but made clear that he would need to be paid an upfront fee and an ongoing royalties if the final songs were released commercially.

Trending on Billboard

Snoop allegedly did just that, using Lawrence’s material on his songs “Pop Pop” and “Get This Dick” from his 2022 album BODR. But Lawrence’s attorneys say no actual licensing deal was ever struck, and no money has ever been sent to their client.

“To date, defendants have refused to properly license the Lawrence tracks or compensate Lawrence for their use in the Broadus tracks,” Lawrence’s attorneys write in the lawsuit, which also named Death Row Records as a defendant.

The lawsuit offers a glimpse at industry practices surrounding the use of backing tracks – pre-recorded instrumental elements that artists can add to a final product. Lawrence says he often creates such tracks “of his own initiative” and then shops them around to prominent artists. But he says he does so with the understanding that “a proper license will and must be negotiated” before a song is commercially released.

Notably, the new case points to a high-profile legal battle in which singer Tracy Chapman accused rapper Nicki Minaj of illegally sampling one of her songs. In that case, a federal judge ruled in 2020 that artists like Minaj are free to “experiment” with materials in the studio to help foster “innovation within the music industry,” but violate copyrights if a song is released. Minaj eventually paid $450,000 to settle the case.

In the current case, Lawrence says that in 2020 he offered Snoop access to two backing tracks for use in the studio. Two years later, when a Snoop rep said the star wanted to use the tracks, Lawrence says he made his licensing requirements clear: a $10,000 flat fee producer advance and a 50% interest in the underlying musical composition. “The [Snoop] representative confirmed that these anticipated terms were acceptable,” the lawsuit says.

But when “Pop Pop” and “Get This Dick” were released a month later, Lawrence says he had never received a formal licensing offer – and has never been paid or credited in the two years since the songs were released. He also claims the songs were not only released on the album, but as NFTs (non-fungible tokens) that generated “tens of millions of dollars.”

“At no point in time did defendants … communicate to Lawrence any intention to exploit the Lawrence tracks in connection with a bundled offering such as [the NFT sale], nor did Lawrence authorize any such exploitation of his work, which was never within his prior contemplation,” his lawyers write.

A rep for Snoop Dogg did not immediately return a request for comment.

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: Young Thug’s criminal trial is in chaos after the judge is forced to recuse himself; Nirvana ends a long-running lawsuit over its famed smiley face logo; the Beastie Boys launch a copyright battle against Chili’s over “Sabotage”; and much more.

THE BIG STORY: Young Thug Trial Judge Removed From Case

The controversial, oft-delayed, never-normal criminal trial of Young Thug got another stunning twist this week, when the Atlanta judge overseeing it was ordered removed from the case. Judge Ural Glanville’s recusal came a month after revelations of a secret “ex parte” meeting between the judge, prosecutors and a key prosecution witness. Attorneys for Thug and other defendants had argued that Glanville aided prosecutors in coercing the witness to testify and that the meeting had violated their constitutional rights to a fair trial. In her decision Monday (July 15), Judge Rachel Krause ruled that the secret meeting had not been “inherently improper” and that Glanville “can and would continue presiding fairly over this matter” if left on the case. But she criticized him for his handling of the fallout from the meeting revelations, and ordered him to step aside for the sake of “preserving the public’s confidence in the judicial system.” That’s all well and good, but the public’s confidence has already repeatedly been tested by the case against Young Thug.  The sprawling racketeering case, which claims the rapper and dozens of others ran a violent Atlanta street gang called YSL, has meandered through the court system for more than two years — first through an unprecedented 10-month jury selection and then repeated delays and disruptions, including the stabbing of another defendant. Prosecutors have only presented part of their vast list of potential witnesses, and nobody expects the case to conclude early next year. All the while, Young Thug has sat in jail, repeatedly denied bond by Glanville. What happens now is anybody’s guess. With a new judge already set to take over (Judge Shakura L. Ingram was listed on the court docket by late Monday) defense attorneys will likely re-file their requests that Thug and the other defendants be released on bond. They will also likely renew their demands for a mistrial over Glanville’s handling of the case — a motion that, if granted, would force prosecutors to start the entire massive case over from scratch. 

THE OTHER BIG STORY: Nirvana Settles Logo Battle

An epic, three-way legal battle over Nirvana‘s iconic smiley face logo is over. For years, lawyers for the rock legends had been locked in sprawling litigation over the image, which emerged as an unofficial emblem for the band in its heyday and has only grown more valuable in recent years amid a boom in ‘90s/’00s nostalgia. First, Nirvana sued fashion designer Marc Jacobs in 2018 for using it without permission on grunge-themed apparel. Then, a designer at Geffen Records named Robert Fisher came out of the woodwork to argue that he — and not Kurt Cobain — had created the image and owned the rights to it. “For 30 years now, Nirvana has reaped enormous profits from Mr. Fisher’s works,” his lawyers wrote when he jumped into the case in 2020. “Nirvana was able to do so without any compensation to Mr. Fisher by falsely claiming authorship and ownership.” Nirvana’s attorneys staunchly maintained that Cobain designed the logo — or at the very least, that Fisher didn’t own any rights to it. But those questions are moot now: Attorneys for all three sides filed a motion last week saying they had reached a settlement to end the case. Go read our full story on the settlement, which recounts the back story of a case that probed into the creative origins of one of rock’s best-known pieces of iconography. 

Trending on Billboard

Other top stories this week…

CAN’T STAND IT – The Beastie Boys sued the owner of Chili’s over allegations that the restaurant chain used the rap trio’s 1994 song “Sabotage” in a social media advertisement without permission — an especially serious allegation from a trio that famously doesn’t allow its music to appear in ads. The offending content? An apparent spoof of the iconic “Sabotage” video featuring a restaurant heist and 1970s-era disguises. LABELS SUE VERIZON – The major music companies filed a massive copyright case claiming the telecom giant effectively encouraged its internet subscribers to steal music on a “staggering” scale. Seeking billions in damages, the case is the latest in a long series of lawsuits aimed at forcing ISPs to crack down on “repeat infringers.” And it came with a zinger: “While Verizon is famous for its ‘Can you hear me now?’ advertising campaign, it has intentionally chosen not to listen to complaints from copyright owners.” AI FIRMS LAWYER UP – AI music companies Suno and Udio hired Latham & Watkins to defend them against lawsuits filed by the three major labels that accuse the companies of using vast swathes of copyright music to “train” their models. Latham is a big deal in the BigLaw world, but especially in the burgeoning sub-niche of AI-training copyright defense litigation. The firm already reps Anthropic in such a case filed by music publishers, and OpenAI in a similar suit filed by The New York Times. DEFAMATORY DENIAL? Film composer Danny Elfman was hit with a libel lawsuit over statements he made to the media last year defending himself from claims that he sexually abused Nomi Abadi, a former friend and fellow composer. In denying the allegations, Abadi says Elfman falsely tarred her as a “liar, homewrecker, and an extortionist.” EX-RHCP IN HOT WATER – Josh Klinghoffer, a former guitarist for the Red Hot Chili Peppers, was sued for wrongful death over allegations that he struck and killed a pedestrian near Los Angeles earlier this year due to “distracted driving.” Lawyers for the victim’s family say they have video evidence showing Klinghoffer “using a device mere seconds before he crashed” into Israel Sanchez. CLASS ACTION IN THE REARVIEW – A group of Spotify customers dropped their class action against the streaming giant over its recent decision to kill its short-lived “Car Thing” device, resolving a case that claimed Spotify left users holding “a useless product.” Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but Spotify has more clearly indicated since the case was first filed that it will provide refunds to people who purchased the Car Thing. ABUSE CLAIMS AGAINST IRV GOTTI –The co-founder of Murder Inc. Records was hit with a lawsuit accusing him of sexual assault and rape, filed by an unnamed woman who says he repeatedly “coerced” her into sex by leveraging his “power and influence in the music world.” 

The Atlanta judge overseeing rapper Young Thug’s gang trial has been ordered removed from the case — a stunning development in sprawling proceedings that have already become the longest-running in Georgia state history.
The ruling, issued by Judge Rachel Krause, came a month after revelations of a secret “ex parte” meeting between Judge Ural Glanville, prosecutors and a key witness. Attorneys for Thug and other defendants have argued that the meeting violated their constitutional rights to a fair trial.

Glanville says the meeting was proper and has repeatedly refused requests to step down, but earlier this month referred the case to Krause to decide whether he should continue presiding over it. And in a decision on Monday (July 15), she said that he should not.

Trending on Billboard

“This court has no doubt that Judge Glanville can and would continue presiding fairly over this matter if the recusal motions were denied,” Krause wrote. “But the necessity of preserving the public’s confidence in the judicial system weighs in favor of excusing Judge Glanville from further handling of this case.”

Krause did not specify who would take over the proceedings, or how the ruling would impact the timeline of the trial, which has already been underway for more than 18 months. Neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys immediately returned requests for comment on Monday.

Thug (Jeffery Williams) and dozens of others were indicted in May 2022 over allegations that his “YSL” was not really a record label called “Young Stoner Life” but rather a violent Atlanta gang called “Young Slime Life.” Citing Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) law, prosecutors claim the group operated a criminal enterprise that committed murders, carjackings, armed robberies, drug dealing and other crimes over the course of a decade.

The trial has already been beset by procedural delays. Jury selection last year took more than 10 months to complete, and prosecutors have already spent many months presenting only part of their vast list of witnesses. The case is expected to run until at least early next year.

Last month, Thug’s attorney, Brian Steel, revealed that he had learned of a secret meeting between Glanville, prosecutors and a key witness named Kenneth Copeland. Claiming that the judge had helped prosecutors coerce the uncooperative Copeland into testifying with threats of extended jail time, Steel argued that the ex parte meeting was clear grounds for a mistrial.

Rather than address Steel’s complaints, Glanville instead demanded to know how he had learned of the meeting and eventually ordered him sent to jail when he refused to share his source. Since that bizarre incident, Steel and other defense attorneys have repeatedly demanded that Glanville step down from the case.

“Glanville’s actions offend public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary,” wrote fellow defendant Yak Gotti (Deamonte Kendrick) in a petition last month to Georgia’s Supreme Court.

In her ruling on Monday, although Krause ordered Glanville removed from the case, she made a point to say that the ex parte meeting itself appeared to have been mostly above board: “While the meeting could have — and perhaps should have — taken place in open court, nothing about the fact of the meeting or the substance discussed was inherently improper.”

Rather than the meeting with prosecutors itself, Krause said that it was Glanville’s later handling of the fallout from those revelations — namely, his choice to rule on a dispute in which he himself was involved — that now required that he step away from the case.

“In presenting his record as to the recusal issues and in ruling on Kendrick’s motion, Judge Glanville evaluated and accepted the truth of his own factual allegations, mandating his recusal,” Krause wrote.