Legal News
Page: 44
Members of a group of men who say they were sexually abused as boys by a Japanese entertainment mogul are accusing the company behind the scandal, previously known as Johnny’s, of not being sincere in dealing with the victims.
Shimon Ishimaru, who represents the victims’ group, said many have not yet received compensation. The group has asked to meet with company officials, but that has not happened, he said at a news conference with three other men who said they were victims.
Ishimaru is among hundreds of men who have come forward since last year, alleging they were sexually abused as teens by boy band producer Johnny Kitagawa. Kitagawa, who died in 2019, was never charged and remained powerful in the entertainment industry.
The company finally acknowledged Kitagawa’s long-rumored abuse last year. The company’s chief made a public apology in May. The Japanese government has also pushed for compensation.
The company, which has changed its name from Johnny & Associates to Smile-Up, said Monday (Jan. 15) it has received requests for compensation from 939 people. Of those, 125 have received compensation, it said in a statement. The company has set up a panel of three former judges to look into the claims.
“We are proceeding with those with whom we have reached an agreement on payments,” it said, while promising to continue with its efforts.
It did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday’s news conference.
The victims’ group said it has been approached by dozens of people who had been told by the company that there was not enough evidence to honor their claims. Details were not disclosed.
The company’s production business, known previously as Johnny’s, has continued under a different name, Starto Entertainment.
According to multiple accounts, Kitagawa abused the boys in his Tokyo luxury mansion, as well as other places, such as his car and overseas hotels, while they were performing as Johnny’s dancers and singers. The abuse continued for several decades.
The repercussions of the scandal have spread. In standup comedy, several women have alleged sexual abuse by a famous comic. He has denied the allegations.
The U.N. Working Group on Business and Human Rights, which is investigating the Johnny’s abuse cases, is to issue a report in June, including recommendations for change.
The Associated Press does not usually identify people who say they were sexually assaulted, but Kitagawa’s recent accusers have given their names. Critics say what happened and the silence of Japan’s mainstream media are indicative of how the world’s third largest economy lags in protecting human rights.
G Herbo has been sentenced to three years of probation after pleading guilty to participating in a scam involving stolen credit card information – a fraud that prosecutors say netted the Chicago rapper almost $140,000 in private jet flights, vacation lodgings and luxury car rentals.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Herbo, who’s had three top-10 albums on the Billboard 200 over the past four years, was sentenced by a Massachusetts federal judge Thursday after taking a plea deal last summer, which saw him plead guilty to one count of wire fraud conspiracy and one count of false statements to a federal official.
Prosecutors say Herbo (Herbert Wright) and others victimized real people and businesses by using stolen credit card info to fund an “extravagant lifestyle” that he flaunted on social media. That included $14,500 for a villa rental in Jamaica, and another $34,000 on renting cars like a Mercedes Benz 5560.
“He gave the impression that his use of private jets, luxury cars and tropical villas were the legitimate fruits of his booming rap career,” U.S. Attorney Joshua S. Levy said in a statement. “However, his lavish lifestyle was shamelessly built on deceit and fraud using stolen account information that inflicted substantial harm on numerous businesses, leaving a wake of victims burdened with financial losses.”
Thursday’s sentence was lighter than the one sought by prosecutors, who had asked the judge to send Herbo to federal prison for one year on top of three years of probation. In addition to probation, the rapper was also ordered to pay restitution and forfeiture of $139,968 for each count, as well as a $5,500 fine.
Herbo and five others were indicted in December 2020, charged with using real credit card info – including actual names, security codes and other private data – to successfully rack up charges. Prosecutors say businesses typically allowed the charges, leading to cardholders disputing them and credit card companies ultimately foisting the losses back on businesses.
The scam, operated from March 2017 through November 2018, was allegedly facilitated by an associate named Antonio Strong, whom Herbo would ask to procure vehicles (“whips”), or accommodation (“cribs”), in addition to other goods and services. One major charge was private jet travel; prosecutors say Herbo eventually used stolen cards to pay for four charters that totaled more than $80,000.
Herbo wasn’t the first hip hop star to face charges over credit card scamming. In 2013, Los Angeles rapper Guerilla Black was sentenced to more than nine years in prison over a fraud involving more than 27,000 stolen credit card numbers. And in 2019, federal prosecutors brought similar charges against Selfmade Kash, a Detroit rapper who had bragged in songs about being the “GOAT swiper”; he later pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years of probation.
In Herbo’s case, prosecutors did not allege that that the rapper himself purchased stolen card information, but they said he knew that Strong was doing so and repeatedly sought him out for that purpose.
“Wright provided Strong with money, Wright received flights, vehicles, and accommodations from Strong using Illicit Account Information, and Wright and Strong communicated frequently concerning their illicit transactions,” prosecutors wrote in one legal filing.
In one example, prosecutors said that Strong had texted Herbo to remind him “Don’t forget DARREN IS MY NAME” when using the stolen information to book luxury vehicle rentals. Herbo then responded via text: “I gotchu bro.”
Initially, Herbo had also been facing two counts of aggravated identity theft, more serious charges that each would have carried a minimum two-year prison sentence if he had been convicted. But those charges were dropped under last summer’s plea deal.
A rep for the rapper did not immediately return a request for comment from Billboard.
A year after the legal battle over Prince’s estate was finally settled, the music legend’s heirs are now suddenly back in court again, battling amongst each other over allegations that certain family members are trying to wrongfully seize control.
The lawsuit, made public Wednesday (Jan. 10) in Delaware court, amounts to a civil war among the members of Prince Legacy LLC, one of the two holding companies created to run the star’s $156 million estate. (Primary Wave, which owns the other half of the estate, is not involved in the dispute.)
The case was filed by L. Londell McMillan and Charles Spicer, two longtime Prince friends who serve as managers for Prince Legacy, over allegations that four of Prince’s family members have been improperly trying to force them out of the company. They say such a move not only violates the group’s operating agreement but would cause massive damage to efforts “to preserve and protect Prince’s legacy.”
“The Individual defendants lack any business and management experience, have no experience in the music and entertainment industries, and have no experience negotiating and managing high-level deals in the entertainment industry,” McMillan and Spicer wrote in the complaint, obtained by Billboard. “They have a documented history of infighting. Based on the amount and complexity of the work that Prince Legacy is involved with, they are simply not capable of stepping in and managing its business.”
The lawsuit targets Prince’s half-sisters Sharon Nelson and Norrine Nelson, as well as his niece Breanna Nelson and his nephew Allen Nelson. None of the defendants could immediately be located for comment, and attorneys who have previously represented them did not return requests for comment.
If Sharon and Norrine “install themselves” and oust McMillan and Spicer, the lawsuit claims that “their interference and intervention will make it impossible to carry on the business of Prince Legacy and will cause irreparable harm to the Company’s good will, existing relationships, and revenue streams.”
Prince died of a fentanyl overdose in April 2016 at the age of 57. Though legendary for his tight control over his intellectual property rights, the iconic artist died without a will, sparking a complex process known as probate in which courts decide how to disperse a deceased person’s estate. Six of Prince’s half-siblings were named as heirs, three of whom later sold their shares to Primary Wave.
The court case finally wrapped up in August 2022 when the estate was formally divided evenly between Prince Legacy (owned by McMillan, Spicer and the remaining heirs) and a similar company called Prince Oat Holdings LLC, which is owned entirely by Primary Wave. At the time, both sides vowed to work together to bring Prince’s music and legacy to a new generation of music fans.
But according to Wednesday’s lawsuit, tensions quickly rose at Prince Legacy behind closed doors. McMillan and Spicer, installed as managing members of the company, claim that Sharon became “disgruntled” because they refused to comply with her “unreasonable demands” about the operations of the estate, and was “offended” her actions were subject to approval from the rest of the company.
“For example, Sharon sought (unsuccessfully) to replace the entire staff of Paisley Park with individuals of her choosing and take charge of Paisley Park,” the lawsuit claims, referring to Prince’s famed Minnesota mansion. “Her demands for lavish events held at Paisley Park at the expense of Paisley Park were likewise rejected.”
Breanna, meanwhile, allegedly became displeased when similar efforts were rejected. Among other demands, the lawsuit claims she to tried to “appoint her son as an intern of Paisley Park in the marketing department” and make other key hires without consulting the company.
Rather than raise their grievances in an appropriate manner, McMillan and Spicer claim that Sharon and Breanna instead “harassed and disparaged” the two managers while demanding that they resign. They say Sharon threatened to publish “false allegations” and sue them unless they would step down.
Perhaps most notably, the lawsuit claims that both women then attempted to unilaterally sell their shares in the holding company to Primary Wave — a contentious subject that evokes the years of messy litigation and dealing that it took to finally resolve the estate case in the current 50-50 structure.
In the lawsuit, McMillan and Spicer say such a sale could not be made without unanimous consent of the members of Prince Legacy. Faced with that limitation, the lawsuit claims that the heirs have been trying to change the company’s bylaws — both to remove McMillan and Spicer as managers and to lower the threshold required to let a member sell their shares to a third party.
The lawsuit is seeking an immediate injunction, blocking any such changes from taking place on the grounds that it would leave the company “irreparably harmed” if allowed to proceed.
“The Individual Defendants’ conduct threatens the myriad business undertakings of Prince Legacy, currently being managed by McMillan and Spicer and threatens the Company’s relationship with third parties and its leverage in negotiating those deals,” the lawsuit says.
Tennessee governor Bill Lee has announced a new state bill to further protect the state’s “best in class artists and songwriters” from AI deepfakes.
While the state already has laws to protect Tennesseans against the exploitation of their name, image and likeness without their consent, this new law, called the Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act (ELVIS Act), is an update to the existing law to specifically address the challenges posed by new generative AI tools. The ELVIS Act also introduces protection for voices.
The announcement arrives just hours after a bipartisan group of U.S. House lawmakers revealed the No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act (No AI FRAUD Act), which aims to establish a framework for protecting one’s voice and likeness on a federal level and lays out First Amendment protections. It is said to be a complement to the Senate’s Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act (NO FAKES Act), a draft bill that was introduced last October.
An artist’s voice, image or likeness may be covered by “right of publicity” laws that protect them from commercial exploitation without authorization, but this is a right that varies state by state. The ELVIS Act aims to provide Tennessee-based talent with much clearer protection for their voices in particular at the state level, and the No AI FRAUD Act hopes to establish a harmonized baseline of protection on the federal level. (If one lives in a state with an even stronger right of publicity law than the No AI FRAUD Act, that state protection is still viable and may be easier to address in court.)
The subject of AI voice cloning has been a controversial topic in the music business in the past year. In some cases, it presents novel creative opportunities — including its use for pitch records, lyric translations, estate marketing and fan engagement — but it also poses serious threats. If an artist’s voice is cloned by AI without their permission or knowledge, it can confuse, offend, mislead or even scam fans.
“From Beale Street to Broadway, to Bristol and beyond, Tennessee is known for our rich artistic heritage that tells the story of our great state,” says Gov. Lee in a statement. “As the technology landscape evolves with artificial intelligence, we’re proud to lead the nation in proposing legal protection for our best-in-class artists and songwriters.”
“As AI technology continues to develop, today marks an important step towards groundbreaking state-level AI legislation,” added Harvey Mason Jr., CEO of the Recording Academy. “This bipartisan, bicameral bill will protect Tennessee’s creative community against AI deepfakes and voice cloning and will serve as the standard for other states to follow. The Academy appreciates Governor Lee and bipartisan members of the Tennessee legislature for leading the way — we’re eager to collaborate with lawmakers to move this bill forward.”
“The emergence of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) resulted in fake recordings that are not authorized by the artist and is wrong, period,” said a representative from Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI). “The Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI) applauds Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, Senate Leader Jack Johnson and House Leader William Lamberth for introducing legislation that adds the word “voice” to the existing law — making it crystal clear that unauthorized AI-generated fake recordings are subject to legal action in the State of Tennessee. This is an important step in what will be an ongoing challenge to regulate generative AI music creations.”
“I commend Governor Lee of Tennessee for this forward-thinking legislation,” said A2IM president/CEO Dr. Richard James Burgess. “Protecting the rights to an individual’s name, voice, and likeness in the digital era is not just about respecting personal identity but also about safeguarding the integrity of artistic expression. This act is a significant step towards balancing innovation with the rightful interests of creators and performers. It acknowledges the evolving landscape of technology and media, setting a precedent for responsible and ethical use of personal attributes, in the music industry.”
“The Artist Rights Alliance is grateful to Gov. Lee, State Senator Jack Johnson and Rep. William Lamberth for launching this effort to prevent an artist’s voice and likeness from being exploited without permission,” said Jen Jacobsen, executive director of the Artist Rights Alliance. “Recording artists and performers put their very selves into their art. Scraping or copying their work to replicate or clone a musician’s voice or image violates the most fundamental aspects of creative identity and artistic integrity. This important bill will help ensure that creators and their livelihoods are respected and protected in the age of AI.”
“AI deepfakes and voice cloning threaten the integrity of all music,” added David Israelite, president/CEO of the National Music Publishers’ Association. “It makes sense that Tennessee state would pioneer these important policies which will bolster and protect the entire industry. Music creators face enough forces working to devalue their work – technology that steals their voice and likeness should not be one of them.”
“Responsible innovation has expanded the talents of creators — artists, songwriters, producers, engineers, and visual performers, among others — for decades, but use of generative AI that exploits an individual’s most personal attributes without consent is detrimental to our humanity and culture,” said Mitch Glazier, chairman/CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). “We applaud Governor Bill Lee, State Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson and House Majority Leader William Lamberth’s foresight in launching this groundbreaking effort to defend creators’ most essential rights from AI deepfakes, unauthorized digital replicas and clones. The ELVIS Act reaffirms the State of Tennessee’s commitment to creators and complements Senator Blackburn’s bipartisan work to advance strong legislation protecting creators’ voices and images at the federal level.”
“Evolving laws to keep pace with technology is essential to protecting the creative community,” said Michael Huppe, president/CEO of SoundExchange. “As we embrace the enormous potential of artificial intelligence, Tennessee is working to ensure that music and those who make it are protected under the law from exploitation without consent, credit, and compensation. We applaud the cradle of country music and the birthplace of rock n’ roll for leading the way.”
According to a press release from the state of Tennessee, the ELVIS Act is also supported by Academy of Country Music, American Association of Independent Music (A2IM), The Americana Music Association, American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI), Church Music Publishers Association (CMPA), Christian Music Trade Association, Folk Alliance International, Global Music Rights, Gospel Music Association, The Living Legends Foundation, Music Artists Coalition, Nashville Musicians Association, National Music Publishers’ Association, Rhythm & Blues Foundation, Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), Society of European Stage Authors and Composers (SESAC), Songwriters of North America (SONA) and Tennessee Entertainment Commission.
A bipartisan group of U.S. House lawmakers announced a new bill on Wednesday (Jan. 10) that regulates the use of AI for cloning voices and likenesses. Called the No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act of 2023 (“No AI FRAUD” Act), the bill aims to establish a federal framework for protecting one’s voice and likeness and lays out First Amendment protections.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
More federal and state legislation regulating artificial intelligence is expected to be announced later today, including a bill from Gov. Bill Lee of Tennessee also regarding AI voice and likeness cloning. On Jan. 5, Gov. Lee hinted at the subject of his forthcoming legislation: “As the technology landscape evolves with artificial intelligence, we’re proud to lead the nation in proposing legal protection for our best-in-class artists and songwriters.”
The No AI FRAUD Act was introduced by Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-FL), the lead Republican sponsor of the bill, alongside Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-PA), Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), Joe Morelle (D-NY) and Rob Wittman (R-VA). It is said to be based on the Senate discussion draft Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act (“NO FAKES” Act), which was announced last October.
“It’s time for bad actors using AI to face the music,” said Rep. Salazar. “This bill plugs a hole in the law and gives artists and U.S. citizens the power to protect their rights, their creative work, and their fundamental individuality online.”
AI voice synthesis technology poses a new problem and opportunity for recording artists. While some laud it as a novel marketing, creative or fan engagement tool, it also leaves artists vulnerable to uncanny impersonations that could confuse, scam or mislead the public.
An artists’ voice, image or likeness may be covered by “right of publicity” laws which protect them from commercial exploitation without authorization, but this is a right that varies state by state. The No AI FRAUD Act aims to establish a harmonized baseline of protection. Still, if one lives in a state with an even stronger right of publicity law than the No AI FRAUD Act, that state protection is still viable, and may be easier to address in court.
This bill is keeping with regulations that a number of music business executives, including those at Sony, ASCAP, UMG, have called for in recent months — following incidents like the viral fake-Drake song “Heart On My Sleeve.”
Mitch Glazier, chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), released a statement, showing support for the No AI FRAUD Act. “The No AI FRAUD Act is a meaningful step towards building a safe, responsible and ethical AI ecosystem, and the RIAA applauds Representatives Salazar, Dean, Moran, Morelle, and Wittman for leading in this important area. To be clear, we embrace the use of AI to offer artists and fans new creative tools that support human creativity. But putting in place guardrails like the No AI FRAUD Act is a necessary step to protect individual rights, preserve and promote the creative arts, and ensure the integrity and trustworthiness of generative AI. As decades of innovation have shown, when Congress establishes strong IP rights that foster market-led solutions, it results in both driving innovation and supporting human expression and partnerships that create American culture.”
Lucian Grainge, chairman and CEO of Universal Music Group, also shared his praise for the new bill in a statement: “Universal Music Group strongly supports the ‘No AI FRAUD Act’ because no one should be permitted to steal someone else’s image, likeness or voice. While we have an industry-leading track record of enabling AI in the service of artists and creativity, AI that uses their voice or identity without authorization is unacceptable and immoral. We call upon Congress to help put an end to nefarious deepfakes by enacting this federal right of publicity and ensuring that all Americans are protected from such harm.”
A judge set bail Tuesday at $750,000 for a former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop legend Tupac Shakur in 1996 and said he can serve house arrest with electronic monitoring ahead of his trial in June.
Court-appointed attorneys for Duane “Keffe D” Davis told The Associated Press after the hearing in Las Vegas that they believe he can post bail. They had asked for bail of not more than $100,000.
The lawyers argued in a court filing a day before that their client — not witnesses, as prosecutors had said — faced danger. And they say that their 60-year-old client is in poor health after battling cancer, which is in remission, and that he won’t flee to avoid trial.
“We believe he can” post bail, public defender Robert Arroyo said after Tuesday’s hearing.
The lawyers accused prosecutors of misinterpreting a jail telephone recording and a list of names provided to Davis’ family members, and of misreporting to the judge that Davis poses a threat to the public if he were released.
Davis “never threatened anyone during the phone calls,” said Arroyo and Charles Cano, deputy special public defenders, in their seven-page filing Monday. “Furthermore, (prosecutors’) interpretation of the use of ‘green light’ is flat-out wrong.”
The “green light” reference is from a recording of an October jail call that prosecutors Marc DiGiacomo and Binu Palal provided last month to Clark County District Judge Carli Kierny, who presided over the bail hearing.
The prosecution’s filing made no reference to Davis instructing anyone to harm someone, or to anyone associated with the case being physically harmed. But the prosecutors added that “In (Davis’) world, a ‘green light’ is an authorization to kill.”
“Duane’s son was saying he heard there was a greenlight on Duane’s family,” Davis’ attorneys wrote, using his first name. “Duane obviously did not know what his son was talking about.”
Davis’ lawyers also used his first name Monday, asking Kierny to consider what they called “the obvious question.”
“If Duane is so dangerous, and the evidence so overwhelming,” they wrote, “why did (police and prosecutors) wait 15 years to arrest Duane for the murder of Tupac Shakur?”
Prosecutors point to Davis’ own words since 2008 — in police interviews, in a 2019 tell-all memoir and in the media — that they say provides strong evidence that he orchestrated the September 1996 shooting.
Davis’ attorneys argue that his descriptions of Shakur’s killing were “done for entertainment purposes and to make money.”
Davis, originally from Compton, California, is the only person still alive who was in the car from which shots were fired in the drive-by shooting that also wounded rap music mogul Marion “Suge” Knight. Knight is now serving 28 years in a California prison for an unrelated fatal shooting in the Los Angeles area in 2015.
Davis’ attorneys noted Monday that Knight is an eyewitness to the Shakur shooting but did not testify before the grand jury that indicted Davis ahead of his arrest arrest Sept. 29 outside his Henderson home. Las Vegas police had served a search warrant at the house in mid-July.
Davis has pleaded not guilty to murder and has been jailed without bail at the Clark County Detention Center in Las Vegas, where detainees’ phone calls are routinely recorded. If convicted at trial, he could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Davis maintains he was given immunity from prosecution in 2008 by an FBI and Los Angeles police task force investigating the killings of Shakur in Las Vegas and rival rapper Christopher Wallace, known as The Notorious B.I.G. or Biggie Smalls, six months later in Los Angeles.
DiGiacomo and Palal say any immunity agreement was limited. Last week, they submitted to the court an audio recording of a Dec. 18, 2008, task force interview during which they said Davis “was specifically told that what he said in the room would not be used against him, but (that) if he were talk to other people, that could put him in jeopardy.”
Davis’ attorneys responded Monday with a reference to the publication 12 years ago of a book written by former Los Angeles police Detective Greg Kading, who attended those interviews.
“Duane is not worried,” the attorneys said, “because his alleged involvement in the death of Shakur has been out in the public since … 2011.”
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: A judge clears French Montana of copyright infringement but sympathizes with his accuser; T.I. and his wife face the latest sexual assault accusations to rock the music industry; Cher battles with her son over a potential conservatorship; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: French Montana’s “Technical” Copyright Victory
Imitation might be the “sincerest form of flattery,” but it isn’t always copyright infringement. That was the key takeaway from an unusual federal court ruling last week, in which a judge dismissed a copyright lawsuit against French Montana – but almost seemed to regret that she had to do so?
The case against French (Karim Kharbouch) was filed by a little-known Chicago artist named Hotwire The Producer (Eddie Lee Richardson), who claimed the star rapper’s 2013 hit “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’” featured an unlicensed sample of his earlier song “Hood Pushin’ Weight.”
In a decision Thursday, Judge Nancy L. Maldonado ruled that French’s song did not technically infringe the rights that Richardson had secured – he registered only the copyright to a sound recording, not the underlying musical composition. But she also expressed “great sympathy” for Richardson, lamenting that he had failed to fully register his copyrights and saying that the outcome of the case “might have been very different” if he had.
“If it is any consolation, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the Court hopes that Richardson will not be deterred in his musical endeavors, now armed with a better understanding of copyright law,” Judge Maldonado wrote. “As it is, though, Richardson’s evidence in this particular case is insufficient to establish copyright infringement.”
For more on what the judge had to say in her opinion — including advising French not to celebrate too much over a “technical win” – go read our full story.
Other top stories this week…
T.I. SEX ASSAULT CASE – The rapper and his wife Tiny were hit with a civil lawsuit claiming they drugged and sexually assaulted a woman they met in a Los Angeles nightclub in 2005. In the complaint, lawyers for the unnamed Jane Doe accuser said that T.I. (Clifford Harris) and Tiny (Tameka Harris) gave her a spiked drink after she was introduced to them in the VIP section of a club, then brought her back to their hotel room where they “forced her to get naked” and assaulted her. In a statement to Billboard, the couple “emphatically and categorically” denied the allegations and vowed to fight back against a lawsuit that they said the plaintiff had been threatening to file for years.
JIMMIE ALLEN ATTORNEY SHAKEUP – More than six months after Jimmie Allen was hit with a pair of sexual assaults, news broke that the country star was parting ways with the legal team that’s been representing him (from the Tennessee law firm Baker Donelson) in the cases. The move to swap lawyers quickly prompted objections from his accusers, who say he’s obstructing the progress of the litigation by “moving through attorneys.”
CHER FIGHTS SON OVER CONSERVATORSHIP – A Los Angeles judge declined to immediately put Cher’s son (Elijah Blue Allman) into a legal conservatorship – an arrangement she is seeking over his opposition — but said he would take up the issue again later this month. Cher petitioned for the conservatorship late last year, arguing that Elijah’s struggles with addiction and mental health have left him unable to manage his money and potentially put his life in danger by making him able to buy drugs.
TUPAC MURDER BAIL BATTLE – A hearing is set for Tuesday over whether Duane “Keffe D” Davis, the former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop music legend Tupac Shakur, should be released on bail. The proceedings had initially been scheduled for last week, but were delayed after prosecutors raised new arguments for why Davis poses a threat to the public if he is released.
MAREN MORRIS DIVORCE SETTLED – Maren Morris reached a settlement to resolve her divorce proceedings against singer/songwriter Ryan Hurd, her husband of five years. Under the terms of the deal, Morris, 33, will pay Hurd, 37, $2,100 per month in child support as the two evenly split time with their three-and-a-half-year-old son, Hayes Andrew. Most of the rest of the settlement was stipulated in a prenuptial agreement, which the couple signed in 2018 and updated in 2022.
A judge on Friday declined to immediately put Cher’s son into the legal conservatorship that she is seeking and he is opposing, but the court will take up the issue again within weeks. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jessica A. Uzcategui ruled that Cher’s attorneys had not given Elijah Blue Allman and his lawyers the necessary documents […]
Imitation might be the “sincerest form of flattery,” but it isn’t always copyright infringement.
That was the unusual message from an Illinois federal judge Thursday, as she dismissed a lawsuit accusing French Montana (Karim Kharbouch) of illegally sampling from a little-known Chicago hip hop producer on his song “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’.”
Eddie Lee Richardson – aka Hotwire The Producer – had claimed that French’s 2013 hit ripped off his instrumental song “Hood Pushin’ Weight.” But Judge Nancy L. Maldonado ruled that the superstar’s song did not technically infringe the rights owned by Richardson.
“The mere fact that the songs may share certain musical elements is simply not enough for a jury to conclude that such sampling actually occurred,” the judge wrote, ending the lawsuit.
Though she sided with French, Judge Maldonado was highly sympathetic to Richardson. She included an unusual note at the end of the ruling, stressing that it was merely a “technical win” for French — and one that he “should not claim as a substantive victory.” And she repeatedly suggested that, had Richardson secured a more complete set of intellectual property rights, the outcome might have been different.
“If it is any consolation, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the Court hopes that Richardson will not be deterred in his musical endeavors, now armed with a better understanding of copyright law,” Judge Maldonado wrote. “As it is, though, Richardson’s evidence in this particular case is insufficient to establish copyright infringement.”
Richardson sued French in 2019, claiming the star and others stole core elements from “Hood Pushin’ Weight” – an instrumental track Richardson published in 2012 on the platform SoundClick – when they wrote “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’,” which reached No. 14 on Billboard’s Hot Rap Songs chart in August 2013.
But the fatal flaw in the lawsuit, as explained by Judge Maldonado on Thursday, was that Richardson only secured a copyright registration to the song’s sound recording, and did not lock up such protection for the underlying musical composition. That means that French would only have infringed “Hood Pushin’ Weight” if he directly sampled from it, the judge said, and not if he merely made a song that included similar music elements.
“Unfortunately for Richardson, his express admission in this case that he has only a sound recording copyright, and not one for a musical composition, means that he does not have exclusive rights in the generic sounds or melodies of HPW,” the judge wrote.
If he had gone the extra step and registered for a copyright on the musical composition, Judge Maldonado said the outcome of the case “might have been very different” than Thursday’s dismissal.
“In that case, Richardson’s expert evidence as to the similarity of the ‘sounds’ or melodies of the songs likely would have been enough to send this case to trial,” the judge wrote. “But with a sound recording registration only, Richardson’s means for establishing infringement are much more limited.”
With his more restricted rights, Richardson needed to provide evidence that French or someone else involved in “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’” directly copied his actual recording into the new song. But Judge Maldonado said the producer had “failed to do so.”
It likely won’t mean much in the wake of a failed lawsuit, but the judge said she had “great sympathy for Richardson’s situation.”
“He created HPW as a teenager, registered a copyright on his own, and brought this action seeking to protect his rights in his original work of music, as provided under the Copyright Act,” the judge wrote. “Unfortunately for Richardson, in the Copyright Act, Congress established a very firm distinction.”
“Put plainly,” the judge wrote, “Richardson cannot bring a claim for copyright infringement of his sound recording based solely on the contention that the songs sound alike.”
Attorneys for both sides did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision.
More than six months after Jimmie Allen was first sued for sexual assault, the country star is splitting with his lawyers — and one of his accusers claims he’s delaying the case by doing so.
In a court filing last month obtained by Billboard, Allen’s lawyers, Jonathan Cole and Katelyn R. Dwyer from the prominent Tennessee law firm Baker Donelson, asked to withdraw from the case, saying the singer had been “unable to comply” with the terms of his representation agreement.
The filings (first reported by The Tennessean) contained no other details about the reason for Allen’s split with his lawyers. But they quickly prompted a response from his accuser’s attorney, who argued last week in her own filing that Allen had already cycled through three different law firms over the past year — and that he was stalling the case in the process.
“Allen has a track record of moving through attorneys,” wrote Elizabeth A. Fegan, counsel for Allen’s Jane Doe accusers. “These tactics are part of Allen’s continuing pattern of conduct to forestall plaintiff’s right to gather discovery to pursue her claims.”
After nearly eight months of litigation, Fegan argued that Allen had thus far “failed to produce the most basic information” during “discovery” — referring to the legal process in which key evidence is exchanged during a lawsuit. She claimed that Allen’s current attorneys at Baker Donelson are in possession of some materials, but that they “do not intend to produce it” before they withdraw from the case.
A rep for Allen did not immediately return a request for comment on the new dispute.
Allen, a once-rising country music star, was sued twice last year for sexual assault — first by a member of his management team who claims he harassed and assaulted her, then again by a woman who says he assaulted her in a Las Vegas hotel room and secretly recorded it. Both women sued as anonymous Jane Does.
The current filings only apply to the first case filed by the Jane Doe who served on Allen’s management team. Fegan did not oppose Cole and Dwyer’s similar motion to withdraw from the second case over the alleged Las Vegas incident, and that request was granted last week.
Allen has strongly denied all the accusations, saying he would “mount a vigorous defense.” He later counter-sued both women, accusing the management employee of defaming him and claiming that the other woman had stolen the phone he allegedly used to record her.
According to the new filings by Fegan (who represents both Doe accusers), when she first contacted Allen regarding her clients’ accusations, he was represented by Frost Brown Todd LLP, another well-known regional law firm. She said she later corresponded with another lawyer (Andrew Brettler of the firm Berk Brettler LLP) before Cole and Dwyer, the attorneys from Baker Donelson, appeared as Allen’s formal counsel when the lawsuit was filed in court.
Since then, she claimed Allen has “not responded to or provided any information pursuant to any of plaintiff’s discovery requests.” Given that there are “impending deadlines” — including a February cut-off for discovery — Fegan argued that allowing Cole and Dwyer to withdraw from the case would result in “severe prejudice.” Instead, she asked for a court order forcing them to turn over key information about the current status of the discovery process before they leave the case.
“Without this information, Plaintiff is unable to diligently prosecute her claims, meet the Court’s current deadlines, or adequately prepare for depositions,” Fegan wrote.