Legal News
Page: 50
Shakira agreed to a deal with Spanish authorities on Monday (Nov. 20) on the first day of a $15 million tax fraud trial in Barcelona that could have resulted in a significant prison sentence for the singer. According to the Associated Press, after maintaining her innocence for five years, the star agreed to a last-minute agreement, telling the presiding magistrate, José Manuel del Amo, that she accepted the agreement reached with prosecutors.
Shakira answered “yes” to confirm her acknowledgement of six counts of failing to pay the Spanish government 14.5 million euros (about $15.8 million) in taxes between 2012 and 2014. Under the agreement, Shakira will receive a suspended three-year sentence and pay a $7.6 million fine.
In a statement shared with Billboard, Shakira said that throughout her career she has always strived “to do what’s right and set a positive example for others. That often means taking the extra step in business and personal financial decisions to procure the absolute best counsel, including seeking the advice of the world’s preeminent tax authorities such as PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, who advised me from the start, and subsequently Ernst & Young Global Limited.”
Unfortunately, she added, despite those efforts she said Spanish tax authorities pursued a case against her, “as they have against many professional athletes and other high-profile individuals, draining those people’s energy, time, and tranquility for years at a time.”
Shakira said she was determined to defend her innocence at trial where her lawyers were confident she’d prevail, but decided to finally resolve the matter with the “best interest of my kids at heart who do not want to see their mom sacrifice her personal well-being in this fight.”
According to the AP, the trial that would have included more than 100 witnesses over the next few weeks adjourned after just eight minutes. In July, prosecutors said they would seek an eight year prison sentence and a fine of $26 million for the 46-year-old singer, with the case hinging on where Shakira lived during the period in question. Prosecutors alleged that the star spent more than half of that time in Spain and should have therefore paid takes on her worldwide income in the country despite listing the Bahamas as her official residence; tax rates are much lower in the Bahamas than in Spain.
“I need to move past the stress and emotional toll of the last several years and focus on the things I love – my kids and all the opportunities to come in my career, including my upcoming world tour and my new album, both of which I am extremely excited about,” Shakira wrote in the statement. “I admire tremendously those who have fought these injustices to the end, but for me, today, winning is getting my time back for my kids and my career.”
In July 2022, Shakira turned down a deal offered by prosecutors to settle the case, saying at the time that she “believes in her innocence and chooses to leave the issue in the hands of the law.” The singer’s spokespeople had previously said she already paid all that she owed plus an additional $3.2 million in interest.
Shakira’s defense team said in November 2022 that she had not spent more than 60 days a year inside Spain during the period in question; they said she would have needed to have spent half the year in Spain to be considered a fiscal resident. Her defense argued that she was away from Barcelona for long stretches due to a 2011 world tour and spent time in the U.S. when she was on The Voice.
Prosecutors disagreed, with the judge writing in 2021 that he found there was “sufficient evidence of criminality” for the case to go to trial. In a separate investigation, Spanish state prosecutors charged Shakira in September with alleged evasion of 6.7 million euros in tax on her 2018 income. Spain has cracked down on soccer stars such as Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo over the past decade for not paying their full taxes; both were found guilty of evasion but avoided prison time after their sentences were suspended.
Shakira (born Shakira Esabel Mebarak Ripoll) has two children with Barcelona soccer star ex Gerard Piqué; the couple lived together in Barcelona before ending their 11-year relationship last year.
At Thursday’s 2023 Latin Grammy awards, Shakira performed “Acróstico,” an emotional, open letter to her children and gave a shout-out to her fans all over the world at the awards show in Seville, Spain. “I want to share this Grammy with my colleagues with whom I have had the pleasure of working and learning,” the Colombian singer said in acceptance speech for best pop song (“Shakira: Bzrp Music Sessions, Vo. 53”).
“With my Latin audience in Spain, in Colombia, in the United States, in Latin America. The Latin public that has taken me to the highest heights, those places I dreamed of since I was a child and to whom I owe everything,” she added. “I also want to share this with my Spanish public who has been with me through thick and thin … who have never stopped giving me love and support for a single day. I will never forget that. This is for you.”
One day after Sean “Diddy” Combs’ former romantic partner and R&B singer Cassie Ventura sued him for years of alleged physical abuse and even rape, the pair have resolved the claims she filed in Manhattan federal court.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
“I have decided to resolve this matter amicably on terms that I have some level of control,” Ventura said in a statement issued late Friday night (Nov. 17) by her attorney, Douglas Wigdor. “I want to thank my family, fans and lawyers for their unwavering support.”
Combs responded with a statement, adding, “We have decided to resolve this matter amicably. I wish Cassie and her family all the best. Love.” No terms were disclosed and the release states that “the parties will have no further statements.” When reached by Billboard, Wigdor declined to comment further. Combs’ attorney, Ben Brafman, did not immediately respond to a request for comment or to verify the resolution.
In the lawsuit, attorneys for Ventura claimed she “endured over a decade of his violent behavior and disturbed demands,” including repeated physical beatings and forcing her to “engage in sex acts with male sex workers” while he masturbated.
According to the complaint, after she attempted to separate herself from him in 2018, Combs “forced her into her home and raped her while she repeatedly said ‘no’ and tried to push him away.”
“Ms. Ventura has now fully escaped Mr. Combs, but the harm that the assaults and sexual abuse he caused her to experience for nearly a decade will forever haunt her,” wrote Cassie’s attorney Douglas Wigdor, who has filed a number of high-profile sexual abuse cases. “She cannot, however, continue to live in silence about what she endured. Mr. Combs remains immensely powerful, and immensely dangerous.”
Combs’ attorney, celebrity defense lawyer Brafman, said his client “vehemently denies these offensive and outrageous allegations,” alleging that for the last six months, Ventura had demanded $30 million “under the threat of writing a damaging book about their relationship, which was unequivocally rejected as blatant blackmail.” In the statement, Brafman continued, “Despite withdrawing her initial threat, Ms. Ventura has now resorted to filing a lawsuit riddled with baseless and outrageous lies, aiming to tarnish Mr. Combs’ reputation and seeking a pay day.”
Wigdor responded that Combs had offered Ventura “eight figures” to prevent her from filing the lawsuit, an offer she rejected.
Ventura, who had an on-and-off public relationship with Combs for 11 years until they split in 2018, says that she met the hip-hop mogul in 2005, when she was just 19 and he was 37. After he signed her to his Bad Boy Records label, she says Combs “lured” her into a romantic relationship – albeit one in which he “asserted complete control over Ms. Ventura’s personal and professional life.”
During the relationship, Ventura says she suffered “episodes of horrific abuse,” including times when he would fly into an “uncontrollable rage” and “beat Ms. Ventura savagely.” She says he would remind her of his ability to harm her, including by requiring her to carry his gun in her purse.
The suit also accuses Combs of blowing up a car belonging to Kid Cudi in 2012 after the rapper expressed interest in Ventura. “Mr. Combs told Ms. Ventura that he was going to blow up Kid Cudi’s car, and that he wanted to ensure that Kid Cudi was home with his friends when it happened,” Ventura’s lawyers write. “Around that time, Kid Cudi’s car exploded in his driveway.”
The case was filed under newly enacted laws in New York and California that revised the time limits for bringing abuse lawsuits, creating limited windows for alleged survivors to take legal action over years-old accusations that would typically be barred under the statute of limitations. In New York, the look-back window closes later this month.
In a statement issued tonight, Wigdor added, “I am very proud of Ms. Ventura for having the strength to go public with her lawsuit. She ought to be commended for doing so.”
Universal Music Group (UMG) wants a federal judge to immediately block artificial intelligence company Anthropic PBC from using copyrighted music to train future AI models, warning that the “damage will be done” by the time the case is over.
A month after UMG sued Anthropic for infringement over its use of copyrighted music to train its AI models, the music giant on Thursday demanded a preliminary injunction that will prohibit the AI firm from continuing to use its songs while the case plays out in court.
The music giant warned that denying its request would allow Anthropic “to continue using the Works as inputs, this time to train a more-powerful Claude, magnifying the already-massive harm to Publishers and songwriters.”
“Anthropic must not be allowed to flout copyright law,” UMG’s lawyers wrote. “If the Court waits until this litigation ends to address what is already clear—that Anthropic is improperly using Publishers’ copyrighted works—then the damage will be done.”
“Anthropic has already usurped Publishers’ and songwriters’ control over the use of their works, denied them credit, and jeopardized their reputations,” the company wrote. “If unchecked, Anthropic’s wanton copying will also irreversibly harm the licensing market for lyrics, Publishers’ relationships with licensees, and their goodwill with the songwriters they represent.”
UMG filed its lawsuit Oct 18, marking the first major case in what is expected to be a key legal battle over the future of AI music. Joined by Concord Music Group, ABKCO and other music companies, UMG claims that Anthropic – valued at $4.1 billion earlier this year — is violating copyrights en masse by using songs without authorization to teach its AI models learn how to spit out new lyrics.
“In the process of building and operating AI models, Anthropic unlawfully copies and disseminates vast amounts of copyrighted works,” lawyers for the music companies wrote. “Publishers embrace innovation and recognize the great promise of AI when used ethically and responsibly. But Anthropic violates these principles on a systematic and widespread basis.”
AI models like the popular ChatGPT are “trained” to produce new content by feeding them vast quantities of existing works known as “inputs.” Whether doing so infringes the copyrights to that underlying material is something of an existential question for the booming sector, since depriving AI models of new inputs could limit their abilities. Content owners in many sectors – including book authors, comedians and visual artists – have all filed similar lawsuits over training.
Anthropic and other AI firms believe that such training is protected by copyright’s fair use doctrine — an important rule that allows people to reuse protected works without breaking the law. In a filing at the Copyright Office last month, Anthropic previewed how it might make such argument in UMG’s lawsuit.
“The copying is merely an intermediate step, extracting unprotectable elements about the entire corpus of works, in order to create new outputs,” the company wrote in that filing. “This sort of transformative use has been recognized as lawful in the past and should continue to be considered lawful in this case.”
But in Thursday’s motion for the injunction, UMG and the music companies sharply disputed such a notion, saying plainly: “Anthropic’s infringement is not fair use”
“Anthropic … may argue that generative AI companies can facilitate immense value to society and should be excused from complying with copyright law to foster their rapid growth,” UMG wrote. “Undisputedly, Anthropic will be a more valuable company if it can avoid paying for the content on which it admittedly relies, but that should hardly compel the Court to provide it a get-out-of-jail-free card for its wholesale theft of copyrighted content.”
A spokesperson for Anthropic did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday.
Sean “Diddy” Combs was sued Thursday by R&B singer and longtime romantic partner Cassie over allegations that he repeatedly physically abused her over the course of a decade, including one instance of rape.
In a complaint filed in Manhattan federal court, attorneys for Cassie (full name Casandra Ventura) claimed she “endured over a decade of his violent behavior and disturbed demands,” including repeated physical beatings and forcing her to “engage in sex acts with male sex workers” while he masturbated.
According to the lawsuit, after she attempted to separate herself from him in 2018, Combs “forced her into her home and raped her while she repeatedly said ‘no’ and tried to push him away.”
“Ms. Ventura has now fully escaped Mr. Combs, but the harm that the assaults and sexual abuse he caused her to experience for nearly a decade will forever haunt her,” wrote Cassie’s attorney Douglas Wigdor, who has filed a number of high-profile sexual abuse cases. “She cannot, however, continue to live in silence about what she endured. Mr. Combs remains immensely powerful, and immensely dangerous.”
In a statement, Combs’ attorney – well-known celebrity defense lawyer Ben Brafman – said his client “vehemently denies these offensive and outrageous allegations.”
“For the past 6 months, Mr. Combs has been subjected to Ms. Ventura’s persistent demand of $30 million, under the threat of writing a damaging book about their relationship, which was unequivocally rejected as blatant blackmail,” Brafman said. “Despite withdrawing her initial threat, Ms. Ventura has now resorted to filing a lawsuit riddled with baseless and outrageous lies, aiming to tarnish Mr. Combs’ reputation and seeking a pay day.”
In his own statement, Wigdor disputed Brafman’s accusations about the settlement negotiations: “Mr. Comb’s offered Ms. Ventura eight figures to silence her and prevent the filing of this lawsuit. She rejected his efforts and decided to give a voice to all women who suffer in silence. Ms. Ventura should be applauded for her bravery.”
Ventura, who had an on-and-off public relationship with Combs for 11 years until they split in 2018, says that she met the hip-hop mogul in 2005, when she was just 19 and he was 37. After he signed her to his Bad Boy Records label, she says Combs “lured” her into a romantic relationship – albeit one in which he “asserted complete control over Ms. Ventura’s personal and professional life.”
“He provided unprecedented avenues for success for the aspiring artist, but in return, demanded obedience, loyalty, and silence,” her lawyers write in her complaint.
During the relationship, Ventura says she suffered “episodes of horrific abuse,” including times when he would fly into an “uncontrollable rage” and “beat Ms. Ventura savagely.” She says he would remind her of his ability to harm her, including by requiring her to carry his gun in her purse.
After years of “again and again” attempting to “escape his tight hold over her life,” Ventura says that in September 2018, she and Combs went to dinner at an Italian restaurant in Malibu “for what she believed would be a discussion about concluding their relationship for good.” Instead, he “forced himself into her apartment and tried to kiss Ms. Ventura” as she “told him to stop and attempted to push him away.”
“Mr. Combs then forcibly pulled off Ms. Ventura’s clothing and unbuckled his belt,” she says. “He proceeded to rape Ms. Ventura while she repeatedly said ‘no’ and tried to push him away.”
Combs is the latest high-profile music executive to face disturbing accusations of sexual wrongdoing over the past month. Former Recording Academy president/CEO Neil Portnow was sued over allegations of sexual assault last week; the the same day, label exec Antonio “L.A.” Reid was hit with similar accusations. Last month, longtime publishing exec Kenny MacPherson was sued for sexual harassment, accused of subjecting a woman to an “onslaught of unwanted sexual advances.”
All three of those cases, like the new case against Combs, were filed under newly enacted laws in New York and California that revised the time limits for bringing abuse lawsuits, creating limited windows for alleged survivors to take legal action over years-old accusations that would typically be barred under the statute of limitations. In New York, the look-back window closes later this month.
In her complaint against Combs, Ventura specifically thanked lawmakers for passing those new laws, saying they would allow her to seek “justice” after she had been “unable to speak up against the years of abuse she endured.”
“After years in silence and darkness, I am finally ready to tell my story, and to speak up on behalf of myself and for the benefit of other women who face violence and abuse in their relationships,” Ventura said in a statement. “With the expiration of New York’s Adult Survivors Act fast approaching, it became clear that this was an opportunity to speak up about the trauma I have experienced and that I will be recovering from for the rest of my life.”
If you were thinking about selling unauthorized Rod Wave merch outside one of his concerts, you might want to think again.
The “Rags2Riches” rapper won a federal court order Tuesday empowering law enforcement to seize bootleg merchandise sold outside his Charlotte concert on Wednesday, regardless of who was selling it.
“The United States Marshals Service and state and local law enforcement officers may seize and impound any infringing merchandise (i.e. unauthorized goods bearing the full name Rod Wave) that is found for sale between 3:00 PM on Wednesday, November 15, 2023 and 3:00 AM on Thursday, November 16, 2023 and is within 5 miles of the Spectrum Center in Charlotte, North Carolina.”
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Wave is the latest artist to turn to the courts to fight fake merch. Metallica‘s authorized vendor filed a similar case in October to quash bootleggers at two St. Louis shows, and SZA won a similar seizure ruling ahead of a September show at TD Garden in Boston. Post Malone, Cher, Beyonce, Jay-Z, Bruno Mars, Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Jimmy Buffet, Aerosmith, Dead & Co. and many others have filed similar cases, which argue that such unauthorized gear violates artists’ trademarks as well as their likeness rights.
Those cases – and the legal bills it takes to fight them — are a sign of just how valuable concert merch has become to artists. According to data from atVenu, the average concertgoer spent $8.16 on t-shirts, posters and other goods in 2022, a 46% leap from what they spent back in 2019. The average show brought in a whopping $20,778 in gross merch sales.
Restraining orders and injunctions typically require a plaintiff to identify who they’re targeting – a fundamental legal safeguard designed to allow an accused party to defend themselves. But like other judges in previous fake merch cases, Judge Kenneth D. Bell ruled the order should apply to any “John Doe” bootleggers who show up at the venue.
“It is impossible to identify potential defendants until they have already begun to infringe upon Mr. Green’s trademarks, at which point he will have suffered irreparable injuries,” the judge wrote. “The lost profits at even one venue may be significant. Counsel has stated that it is impossible to identify defendants in advance and difficult even to ascertain their identities when confronted at the venue.”
The judge included key limits in his ruling. He required Wave to post a $5000 security bond to cover any merchandise that was wrongfully seized, and said that any alleged bootleggers should be “immediately served” with the lawsuit and “given a receipt if merchandise is seized.” Such defendants can then challenge the order in court
But Judge Bell also paved the way for Wave to win a more-expansive injunction that “reaches beyond Charlotte,” banning bootleggers and allowing for seizures at “future stops on his tour.” A hearing on such an order is set for later this month, where Wave himself must be present and his lawyers will “bring representative samples of any seized merchandise.”
A spokesperson for Wave (born Rodarius Green) declined to comment when asked by Billboard on Thursday about the order and how it had been used at Wednesday’s concert.
Attorneys for Eothen “Egon” Alapatt are firing back at a lawsuit that claims he stole dozens of private notebooks belonging to the late hip-hop legend MF Doom, calling the case “baseless and libelous” and telling his side of the disputed story.
MF Doom’s widow sued last month, claiming that Egon (a label exec and a former collaborator with the famed rapper) wrongfully took possession of the notebooks as Doom spent a decade in his native England ahead of his shocking death in 2020, and has refused to return them ever since.
But in a strongly worded response filed in court Tuesday (Nov. 14), Alapatt’s attorney, Kenneth Freundlich, sharply disputed those allegations, saying that the “frivolous” case contained “knowingly false statements” about his client.
“Plaintiffs’ complaint is the continuation of a year-long smear campaign filled with baseless and libelous attacks on Alapatt’s integrity and character,” Freundlich wrote.
Doom, whose real name was Daniel Dumile, traveled to the United Kingdom in 2010 to perform but was later prohibited from returning to the United States due to immigration issues. He remained overseas until his sudden passing on Oct. 31, 2020, at the age of 49, from rare complications related to blood pressure medication.
In her lawsuit, Doom’s widow, Jasmine Dumile Thompson, says that when the rapper left the country, he left behind a collection of 31 “rhyme books” in his Los Angeles studio. She says they include “musings and other creative ideations,” including original lyrics to released music, lyrics to unreleased songs and song ideas — a veritable treasure trove for Doom fans and hip-hop historians.
Thompson’s lawyers say that Alapatt “took advantage of Doom’s being out of the country” to buy the notebooks from his landlord for $12,500 without ever consulting the rapper. When Doom himself asked for their return, the lawsuit claims, Alapatt “delayed, obfuscated and deflected” and then ultimately refused to return them. And since Doom’s death, Thompson says Alapatt has made the “astonishing” demand that the notebooks must be donated to an archive — a choice that she says runs contrary to Doom’s wishes that they remain “secret and confidential.”
“Who is Alapatt to decide that the notebooks containing the personal and intellectual property of Doom, the rights to which are plaintiffs’ alone, must be donated to an archive against the will of the deceased artist and his surviving family?” Thompson’s lawyers wrote in their complaint. “Setting aside the fact that the notebooks were stolen, Alapatt’s arrogant paternalism and extreme tone-deafness in trying to dictate that the notebooks be donated is astonishing.”
In Tuesday’s response, Alapatt’s lawyers admit that he took possession of Doom’s materials but denied that Doom had actually been their legal owner when he died. The real owner, they say, was the studio landlord because the notebooks had been left behind at his property and a large amount of rent had been left unpaid. If not for Alapatt’s actions, his lawyers argued that the landlord “would have either sold or possibly destroyed the notebooks.”
“Contrary to the knowingly false statements contained in the complaint, Alapatt saved and preserved the notebooks after he purchased them from DOOM’s former landlord who owned and controlled the notebooks because DOOM had abandoned his studio and was in years’ long arrears on rent,” Freundlich wrote in the court documents.
Alapatt’s lawyers say he later repeatedly tried to make arrangements with Doom and his reps to return the materials during his lifetime, but that the artist had failed to follow up. At one point, his attorneys say, Doom “seemed to have completely forgotten his prior discussion with Alapatt” about returning the notebooks.
Tuesday’s response confirms one key allegation of Thompson’s lawsuit: That Alapatt had said he would only return the notebooks if a digital copy of them was donated to an archive. (In the filing, his lawyers say he suggested “the Cornell Hip-Hop Archive, the Smithsonian, or another accredited archive of their choosing.”)
But his lawyers argue that the request was a fair one because donating the materials would help protect “precious artifacts of hip-hop history” and allow “scholars and researchers to study DOOM’s creativity and further entrench his creative genius — not just in hip-hop but in American history.”
“Rather than accept Alapatt’s generous offer,” Freundlich writes in Tuesday’s filing, “plaintiffs chose to continue their hurtful, and defamatory attacks against Alapatt by filing this frivolous complaint.”
Attorneys for Thompson did not immediately return a request for comment on Wednesday.
The bitter legal battle between Sean “Diddy” Combs and alcohol giant Diageo over their soured tequila venture is going to be paused until at least next spring, an appeals court says.
In a ruling on Tuesday, a panel of judges on New York’s appellate division granted Diageo’s request for a so-called stay of the lawsuit, in which Combs accused the company of racism and failing to adequately support his DeLeon brand of tequila.
Diageo’s attorneys asked for the pause while they try to convince the appeals court to overturn a ruling this summer for Diddy and send the case to private arbitration, which would negate the need for continued litigation. Combs’ attorneys had called Diageo’s request a “desperate attempt to delay judicial scrutiny for its discriminatory conduct.”
Tuesday’s decision means any progress in the underlying case will be paused until at least April, which is when the appeals court said Diageo’s appeal must be ready to be heard.
Following the ruling, Combs’ attorney John Hurston told Billboard: “Once the appellate court considers the actual merits, we are confident that they will reach the same conclusion as two separate judges already: that Diageo can’t avoid a public trial.”
A spokeswoman for Diageo did not immediately return a request for comment.
Combs sued in May, claiming Diageo breached his partnership deal for DeLeon Tequila by failing to properly support the brand. But he also went a lot further than that, leveling accusations of racism and claiming Diageo had treated his product line “worse than others because he is Black.”
“Cloaking itself in the language of diversity and equality is good for Diageo’s business, but it is a lie,” Combs’ lawyers wrote. “While Diageo may conspicuously include images of its Black partners in advertising materials and press releases, its words only provide the illusion of inclusion.”
The case claimed that Diageo had “typecast” his DeLeón Tequila as a “Black brand” that could only be sold to “urban” consumers, harming its sales and leaving it lagging behind competing Diageo brands like Casamigos and Don Julio.
Diageo responded a month later, calling the lawsuit a “bad faith, sham action” filed by a star who had “amassed nearly one billion dollars” from their partnership but now wanted to “extract” billions more.
“These allegations are nothing more than opportunistic attempts to garner press attention and distract the court from the fact that plaintiff’s breach-of-contract claim is entirely without merit,” the company’s attorneys wrote. “Diageo categorically denies these accusations.”
Diageo demanded that the case be sent to private arbitration, citing a provision in Diddy’s partnership contract that they said required such disputes be handled out of court. The company argued that, if Diddy’s “inflammatory rhetoric” about racism was removed, the case was nothing more than a “garden variety” business dispute that must be arbitrated.
But in September, the judge overseeing the case rejected that argument, meaning the case would move forward in state court, with the trial open to the public.
Diageo quickly appealed that ruling, and asked for a stay to prevent the case from moving forward while the appeal played out. Without a pause, the company said it faced “irreparable harm” because it would be forced to “arbitrate and litigate the same issues at the same time.”
After Tuesday’s ruling granting that request, the case will not proceed until the appellate court rules on Diageo’s appeal. Tuesday’s order said the appeal must be “perfected for the April 2024 Term of this Court,” but it’s unclear if that means the case will be decided by then, or merely argued and briefed.
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: An Atlanta judge rules that Young Thug’s rap lyrics can be used as evidence in his upcoming gang trial; two new sexual assault cases are filed against powerful music executives; R. Kelly sues the federal prison system for allegedly leaking private info to a gossip blogger; and more.
THE BIG STORY: Rap Lyrics Headed To Trial
After years of reporting on “rap on trial” — the controversial use of lyrics as criminal evidence against the artist who wrote them — it was remarkable to watch last week as prosecutors from America’s rap capital battled with defense attorneys for one of hip-hop’s biggest stars over that very subject in open court.
Is Atlanta’s district attorney “targeting the right to free speech” by using Young Thug’s lyrics in the upcoming gang trial? Or are prosecutors merely pointing out glaring admissions of criminal activity that “just happen to come in the form of lyrics”?
In the end, as they often do when it comes to lyrics, the judge sided with prosecutors: “They’re not prosecuting your clients because of the songs they wrote,” said Judge Ural Glanville, speaking to Thug’s lawyer Brian Steel during the hearing. “They’re using the songs to prove other things your clients may have been involved in. I don’t think it’s an attack on free speech.”
For a full recap of the hours-long hearing, go read our full story here. And look out for our upcoming coverage on the YSL trial, which is set to start Nov. 27.
THE OTHER BIG STORY: More Music #MeToo
The music industry saw two new lawsuits last week alleging sexual abuse by powerful men, continuing a wave of such cases filed over the past year.
The first, filed Wednesday (Nov. 8) in New York state court, accused former Recording Academy president/CEO Neil Portnow of drugging and sexually assaulting a woman in 2018. Those are the same allegations that were partially aired four years ago in an explosive discrimination complaint filed by Deborah Dugan, who briefly replaced Portnow as Academy boss after he stepped down in August 2019.
The second lawsuit, filed later that same day in New York federal court, accused legendary industry exec Antonio “L.A.” Reid of sexually assaulting A&R executive Drew Dixon and then derailing her once-promising career when she refused his further advances. Those claims, too, were already public to some extent: Dixon previously accused Reid of harassment in a 2017 article for The New York Times as well as a subsequent documentary.
Over the past year, such accusations have become troublingly common.
Two women are suing Atlantic Records over abuse allegations against late co-founder Ahmet Ertegun; country star Jimmie Allen is facing two sexual assault lawsuits; Backstreet Boys member Nick Carter has been sued by three different women who claim he sexually assaulted them as minors in the 2000s; Kenny MacPherson, the CEO of Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s publishing unit, is facing a lawsuit claiming he subjected an employee at a previous company to an “onslaught of unwanted sexual advances”; a woman is suing singer Jason Derulo for allegedly harassing her and then dropping her from a deal with his Atlantic imprint after she rebuffed him; and Kobalt Music Group is facing claims that it enabled former exec Sam Taylor as he leveraged his position of power to demand sex from a songwriter.
Other top stories this week…
R. KELLY SUES FEDS OVER LEAKS – The disgraced R&B singer filed a lawsuit against the federal Bureau of Prisons over allegations that someone at the agency leaked private information about him — including recordings of private phone calls with his girlfriend and lawyers — to social media personality Tasha K, who then shared them with millions of followers. Before you ask: Yes, that’s the same YouTube gossip host that Cardi B successfully sued for defamation last year after Tasha K posted false stories about drug use, STDs and prostitution by the superstar rapper.
LINKIN PARK LITIGATION – The band was hit with a lawsuit over the anniversary re-release of its smash hit 2000 debut album Hybrid Theory, filed by a bassist who says he performed on rare and unreleased recordings that were featured as part of the deluxe box set but has “never been paid a penny.”
OFFSET ASSAULT ACCUSATION – The Migos rapper (real name Kiari Kendrell Cephus) was sued by a security guard who claims he was assaulted two years ago by Offset and YRN Murk after he turned them away from ComplexCon, a cultural festival hosted by Buzzfeed’s Complex Networks.
In a stunning wrinkle in the fevered battle between Kakao Corp. and HYBE for a controlling stake in K-pop company SM Entertainment, Kakao’s chief investment officer was indicted Monday (Nov. 13) for allegedly manipulating the stock price to ward off HYBE’s rival bid.
Bae Jae-hyun, Kakao’s chief investment officer, will face a trial for violating South Korea’s Capital Markets Act, according to reports. He allegedly inflated the price of SM Entertainment shares by purchasing 240 billion won ($181.3 million) of shares while HYBE, home of K-pop group BTS, was attempting to buy a large stake in the company. Prosecutors also charged Kakao using a provision in the law that allows both a company and its employees to be punished.
The scheme to manipulate SM Entertainment’s share price stemmed from a heated competition between Kakao and HYBE to become the largest shareholder in SM Entertainment — home to such K-pop acts as NCT Dream and Red Velvet — to help rebuild the company after it terminated a production contract with its founder, Lee Soo-man. In February, HYBE acquired a 14.8% stake in the K-pop giant from Lee and attempted to acquire an additional 25% stake through a tender offer at 120,000 won ($92.36) per share. HYBE’s bid was too low, however, and the tender offer gave HYBE less than 1% of outstanding shares.
Bae allegedly acquired SM Entertainment shares to drive up the price above HYBE’s tender offer price, thus thwarting its efforts to obtain a larger stake. On March 6, Kakeo and Kakao Entertainment followed with a tender offer of 150,000 won ($115.46) per share — 25% above HYBE’s tender offer price — and ended up acquiring an additional 25% stake, bringing its ownership of SM Entertainment to 40%. HYBE abandoned its bid to control SM Entertainment on March 13 and announced on March 28 that it would sell nearly half of its stake in SM Entertainment to Kakao for 248.8 billion won ($191.8 million).
Kakao is a South Korean tech conglomerate that owns the country’s dominant chap app, KakaoTalk, and a popular taxi-hailing app, Kakao Mobility, among other products. A subsidiary, Kakao Entertainment, owns Starship Entertainment, home to such K-pop groups as Monsta X, as well as South Korea streaming app Melon. In August, Kakao Entertainment and SM Entertainment revealed their plans to create a North American joint venture by the end of 2023.
The investigation into stock manipulation started soon after Kakao and Kakao Entertainment beat out HYBE for the SM Entertainment stake. South Korean officials raided the offices of Kakao and Kakao Entertainment on April 6 and SM Entertainment’s headquarters on April 18. Bae was arrested for suspected stock manipulation on Oct. 19 before being indicted on Monday. Other executives were suspected of working with Bae to inflate SM Entertainment’s share price, according to a Reuters article at the time of his arrest, but to date no one else has been charged.
R. Kelly is suing the federal Bureau of Prisons over allegations that the agency leaked private information about the disgraced singer to social media personality Tasha K — the same YouTube gossip host that Cardi B sued for defamation last year.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In a complaint filed Monday (Nov. 13) in Chicago federal court, Kelly’s lawyers say an unnamed Bureau of Prisons (BOP) agent illegally accessed Kelly’s digital prison records — including recordings of private phone calls with his girlfriend and lawyers — and sold them to Tasha, who then broadcast them online to more than 1 million followers.
“The defendant United States of America breached its duty of care to the plaintiff when it allowed countless BOP officers to access plaintiff’s confidential information without any legal basis to do so,” Kelly’s lawyer Jennifer Bonjean writes.
The lawsuit, which also names Tasha K (Latasha Kebe) as a defendant, claims that the influencer then “rallied her massive following to harass the plaintiff with the use of the stolen information and created chaos in plaintiff’s personal life.”
The leaks left Kelly “isolated and fearful to communicate with his attorneys or other third parties,” the lawsuit claims, because he knew it could be “released to the general public for mass exploitation.”
Kelly was convicted in 2021 on racketeering and sex trafficking charges stemming from accusations that he orchestrated a long-running scheme to abuse women. In September 2022, he was convicted in Chicago on separate federal charges of child pornography and enticement of minors for sex. The singer, who is currently appealing both convictions, was later sentenced to 30 years in prison.
If Kebe’s name sounds familiar, it should. Last year, Cardi B won a $3.9 million defamation judgment against the blogger over false statements Kebe made about drug use, STDs and prostitution on her YouTube channel “UnWinewithTashaK.” Kebe has since filed for federal bankruptcy, citing her inability to pay that huge judgment.
In his new lawsuit, Kelly claims that Kebe first published private information in November 2019, starting with a video called “R. Kelly Can’t Control his Girlfriends while Behind Bars” that contained information Kebe said came from a “phone tap somewhere.” Later posts allegedly divulged more personal information, including highly-sensitive communications with his legal team.
“The communications … related to personal and family problems, romantic interests, health problems, literacy issues, and issues related to the defense of his pending criminal cases,” Kelly’s lawyers write.
According to the lawsuit, an internal BOP investigation revealed that an unnamed officer had pulled Kelly’s records from the agency’s TruView system, a digital database of information on prisoners. The officer then allegedly scanned them and “emailed that scan to third parties, including defendant Kebe.” But that probe ended without any action against the officer, Kelly’s lawyers claim.
“No charges were brought against defendant BOP Officer A, and the government has refused to reveal any details about the investigation including the identity of Officer A,” Bonjean wrote in Monday’s complaint. “In short, there has been a cover-up of the rampant BOP misconduct that is ongoing.”
Kelly’s lawyers claim that illegal leaks continued even after the BOP was made aware of the initial disclosures to Kebe. They cited a report last summer by the Washington Post about Kelly’s $25,000 in commissary funds — a report that resulted in federal prosecutors seizing the money to pay off his victims.
In technical legal terms, Kelly’s lawyers allege that the leaks amounted to negligence, an invasion of his privacy, an intentional infliction of emotional distress, civil theft and civil conspiracy. They also claim that the officer who stole the records violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act — a federal statute that makes computer hacking illegal.
A spokesperson for the BOP declined to comment, citing agency policy on pending litigation. An attorney who has represented Tasha K on other matters did not immediately return a request for comment.