Legal News
Page: 73
The widow of late hip-hop legend MF DOOM, Jasmine Dumile Thompson, filed a lawsuit, claiming that his manager, Eothen “Egon” Alapatt, stole 31 of the rapper’s notebooks that were used to write down many of his beloved songs. This included the tracks from Operation Doomsday (1999), Madvillainy (2004), and MM…FOOD (2004) as well as unreleased songs ideas, musings and “other creative ideations.”
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The case, filed in California federal court Tuesday, is not the first time DOOM’s fans have heard about these notebooks. Back in March, Thompson posted emails between her late husband and Alapatt to the @MFDOOM instagram account with the caption “Egon, Give the Notebooks Back,” sending fans to rally around the rapper’s estate and its struggle to repossess his writing material. Alapatt, who first started working with DOOM as general manager and a&r of Stones Throw Records, has admitted to having the notebooks in the past, according to the complaint, but the estate says he refuses to return them.
Instead, Alapatt is allegedly demanding that the notebooks be “donated to a university or government archive” or a “museum or other institution of [Alapatt’s] choosing,” even though doing so is contrary to his estate’s wishes. “[The notebooks] were intended by DOOM to be secret and confidential,” the lawsuit reads.
It all started in 2010, when the metal-masked rapper travelled to the U.K. to perform but was prohibited from returning to the U.S. due to immigration issues. (He remained in the U.K. until his death on October 31, 2020 at the age of 49). During his absence, the 31 notebooks of lyrical material were left behind in his Los Angeles studio, according to the lawsuit, and Alapatt “took unlawful possession” of the books about six years later.
“Alapatt never consulted with DOOM about his acquisition of the notebooks and took advantage of DOOM’s being out the country to obtain them,” the lawsuit says, but when first confronted by DOOM about the whereabouts of his books, Alapatt allegedly lied at first, saying he didn’t have them. After the landlord of DOOM’s studio allegedly told DOOM that Alapatt did, in fact, have the notebooks, DOOM confronted the manager again.
Alapatt allegedly then told DOOM he got the notebooks because DOOM owed $12,500 in past-due rent, and if someone did not pay it off, the landlord was going to destroy the possessions he left behind. Because Alapatt claims to have paid that rent on DOOM’s behalf, he said that the physical notebooks themselves were legally his property, according the complaint. (Earlier this year, Thompson has come to suspect that DOOM owed no additional rent, and Alapatt simply paid $12,500 to the landlord to buy the books.)
In Summer 2020, Alapatt apparently offered to send DOOM and his family photocopies of the contents of the notebooks for the “sole purpose” of allowing DOOM access but would not give back the physical books themselves. DOOM refused this proposal. In October 2020, shortly before the rapper’s death, the estate says Alapatt sent DOOM a hard drive with large format scans of every notebook he lost, all of which were time stamped between 2018 and March 2020. The lawsuit claims that this proves Alapatt was infringing on his estate’s intellectual property, which is now held by his business entity, Gas Drawls, by creating and disseminating unlawful copies of DOOM’s lyrics.
It is unclear who Alapatt sent these scans to, if anyone, but the lawsuit claims Alapatt was talking to potential buyers, including hip-hop archivists, to sell the notebooks or its copies.
“Although Alapatt has professed that he ‘does not intend to publish’ the unauthorized digital copies he made, he does not have to ‘publish’ the copies of his infringing copies to be liable,” argues the complaint. “Regardless, [DOOM’s estate] alleges that Alapatt actually shared the copies of the notebook he made with others.”
Now, after DOOM’s death, Thompson is intent on getting the notebooks returned to the family, the photo copies destroyed, and “significant compensation” for the damage Alapatt has caused. Along with copyright infringement, the lawsuit alleges “fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, constructive trust and declaratory relief” and requests a jury trial.
Thompson and Gas Drawls are represented by Miles M. Cooley of Freedman and Taitelman. Alapatt is represented by Kenneth Freundlich of Freundlich Law. Both parties did not immediately return requests for comment on the complaint.
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: Universal Music Group (UMG) and other music companies file a hotly-anticipated copyright lawsuit over how artificial intelligence (AI) models are trained; DJ Envy’s business partner Cesar Pina is hit with criminal charges claiming he ran a “Ponzi-like” fraud scheme; Megan Thee Stallion reaches a settlement with her former label to end a contentious legal battle; Fyre Fest fraudster Billy McFarland is hit with a civil lawsuit by a jilted investor in his new project; and more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: AI Music Heads To Court
When UMG and several other music companies filed a lawsuit last week, accusing an artificial intelligence company called Anthropic PBC of violating its copyrights en masse to “train” its AI models, my initial reaction was: “What took so long?”
The creators of other forms of content had already been in court for months. A group of photographers and Getty Images sued Stability AI over its training practices in January, and a slew of book authors, including Game of Thrones writer George R.R. Martin and legal novelist John Grisham, sued ChatGPT-maker OpenAI over the same thing in June and again in September. And music industry voices, like the RIAA and UMG itself, had repeatedly signaled that they viewed such training as illegal.
For months, we asked around, scanned dockets and waited for the music equivalent. Was the delay a deliberate litigation strategy, allowing the fast-changing market and the existing lawsuits to play out more before diving in? Was the music business focusing on legislative, regulatory or business solutions instead of the judicial warpath they chose during the file-sharing debacle of the early 2000s?
Maybe they were just waiting for the right defendant. In a complaint filed in Nashville federal court on Oct. 18, UMG claimed that Anthropic — a company that got a $4 billion investment from Amazon last month — “unlawfully copies and disseminates vast amounts of copyrighted works” in the process of teaching its models to spit out new lyrics. The lengthy complaint, co-signed by Concord Music Group, ABKCO and other music publishers, echoed arguments made by many rightsholders in the wake of the AI boom: “Copyrighted material is not free for the taking simply because it can be found on the internet.”
Like the previous cases filed by photographers and authors, the new lawsuit poses something of an existential question for AI companies. AI models are only as good as the “inputs” they ingest; if federal courts make all copyrighted material off-limits for such purposes, it would not only make current models illegal but would undoubtedly hamstring further development.
The battle ahead will center on fair use — the hugely important legal doctrine that allows for the free use of copyrighted material in certain situations. Fair use might make you think of parody or criticism, but more recently, it’s empowered new technologies: In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the VCR was protected by fair use; in 2007, a federal appeals court ruled that Google Image search was fair use.
Are AI models, which imbibe millions of copyrighted works to create something new, the next landmark fair use? Or are they just a new form of copyright piracy on a vast new scale? We’re about to find out.
More key details about the AI case:
– The timing of the lawsuit would suggest that UMG is aiming for a carrot-and-stick approach when it comes to AI. On the same day the new case was filed, UMG announced that it was partnering with a company called BandLab Technologies to forge an “an ethical approach to AI.” Hours later, news also broke that UMG and other labels were actively negotiating with YouTube on a new AI tool that would allow creators to make videos using the voices of popular (consenting) recording artists.
-The huge issue in the case is whether the use of training inputs amounts to infringement, but UMG’s lawyers also allege that Anthropic violates its copyrights with the outputs that its models spit out — that it sometimes simply presents verbatim lyrics to songs. That adds a different dimension to the case that’s not present in earlier AI cases filed by authors and photographers and could perhaps make it a bit easier for UMG to win.
-While it’s the first such case about music, it should be noted that the Anthropic lawsuit deals only with song lyrics — meaning not with sound recordings, written musical notation, or voice likeness rights. While a ruling in any of the AI training cases would likely set precedent across different areas of copyright, those specific issues will have to wait for a future lawsuit, or perhaps an act of Congress.
Go read the full story on UMG’s lawsuit, with access to the actual complaint filed in court.
Other top stories this week…
MEGAN THEE SETTLEMENT – Megan Thee Stallion reached an agreement with her record label 1501 Certified Entertainment to end more than three years of ugly litigation over a record deal that Megan calls “unconscionable.” After battling for more than a year over whether she owed another album under the contract, the two sides now say they will “amicably part ways.”
DJ ENVY SCANDAL DEEPENS – Cesar Pina, a celebrity house-flipper with close ties to New York City radio host DJ Envy, was arrested on federal charges that he perpetrated “a multimillion-dollar Ponzi-like investment fraud scheme.” Though Envy was not charged, federal prosecutors specifically noted that Pina had “partnered with a celebrity disc jockey and radio personality” — listed in the charges as “Individual-1” — to boost his reputation as a real estate guru. The charges came after months of criticism against Envy, who is named in a slew of civil lawsuits filed by alleged victims who say he helped promote the fraud.
FOOL ME ONCE… – Billy McFarland, the creator of the infamous Fyre Festival who served nearly four years in prison for fraud and lying to the FBI, is facing a new civil lawsuit claiming he ripped off an investor who gave him $740,000 for his new PYRT venture. The case was filed by Jonathan Taylor, a fellow felon who met McFarland in prison after pleading guilty to a single count of child sex trafficking.
AI-GENERATED CLOSING ARGS? – Months after ex-Fugees rapper Prakazrel “Pras” Michel was convicted on foreign lobbying charges, he demanded a new trial by making extraordinary accusations against his ex-lawyer David Kenner. Michel claims Kenner, a well-known L.A. criminal defense attorney, used an unproven artificial intelligence (AI) tool called EyeLevel.AI to craft closing arguments — and that he did so because he owned a stake in the tech platform. Kenner declined to comment, but EyeLevel has denied that Kenner has any equity in the company.
ROLLING STONES GET SATISFACTION – A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit accusing The Rolling Stones members Mick Jagger and Keith Richards of copying their 2020 single “Living in a Ghost Town” from a pair of little-known songs, ruling that the dispute — a Spanish artist suing two Brits — clearly didn’t belong in his Louisiana federal courthouse.
JUICE WRLD COPYRIGHT CASE – Dr. Luke and the estate of the late Juice WRLD were hit with a copyright lawsuit that claims they unfairly cut out one of the co-writers (an artist named PD Beats) from the profits of the rapper’s 2021 track “Not Enough.”
Billy McFarland, the creator of the infamous Fyre Festival who served nearly four years in prison for fraud and lying to the FBI, is facing a new civil lawsuit claiming he ripped off an investor who gave him $740,000 for his new PYRT venture.
In a summons filed in New York Supreme Court on Tuesday (Oct. 17), an attorney for 54-year-old Jonathan Taylor of New York — who met McFarland while both were serving prison sentences at Elkton Federal Correctional Institute in Ohio, as reported previously by Billboard – states that McFarland needs to appear in court and agree to repay Taylor or face legal action for civil fraud, conversion, civil conspiracy, breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
According to the summons, Taylor struck an agreement with McFarland and his business partner, Michael Falb (also named as a defendant), in which they allegedly offered him one-third equity in the venture, PYRT Technologies, in exchange for a $740,000 investment. Taylor claims McFarland and Falb then reneged on the deal by refusing to grant him the equity they promised or to return the money despite his demands that they do so.
Taylor is asking for monetary damages in the amount of $740,000, along with statutory damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.
Notably, the $740,000 figure is $100,000 more than what Taylor had said he was owed last October, in emails between McFarland’s lawyer and Taylor’s lawyer that were obtained by Billboard. Taylor now says that the increase is the result of an investigation conducted by Taylor’s attorney, which found $100,000 in new charges using Taylor’s money since the men first began settlement talks in September 2022.
McFarland did not respond to requests for comment on the summons.
In 2016, Taylor landed at Elkton Federal Correctional Institute after pleading guilty to a single count of child sex trafficking stemming from his relationship with a 15-year-old prostitute in Florida. Taylor, who is 23 years older than McFarland, struck up a friendship with the festival founder shortly after McFarland arrived at the low-security prison following his expulsion from a minimum-security prison in Otisville, N.Y., for contraband violations.
Taylor and McFarland shared an affinity for entrepreneurship and stayed in touch after Taylor was released from prison in 2020 with plans to work together. Their first project — a podcast about McFarland’s life in prison recorded from behind bars — landed McFarland in solitary confinement for six months. It was during that half-year stretch in “the hole” that McFarland wrote out a 50-page investor deck — obtained by Billboard — of how he would harness continued interest in Fyre Fest and launch PYRT, a post-prison project to repair his image and “make the impossible happen.”
The PYRT document indicates that McFarland planned to officially launch the project with a treasure hunt revealed through hidden clues in a memoir he would publish telling his side of the Fyre Fest story. The global treasure hunt was intended to draw people to the Bahamas, to be followed by the building of the physical and digital architecture for a 24-villa PYRT Cay development. Eventually, he wrote, a metaverse would be built around PYRT allowing millions of “elevated people” to digitally interact with the island paradise, “changing how the virtual interacts with and affects the real world.”
After McFarland was released from solitary confinement in April 2021, he sent the plan to Taylor, who transferred money to McFarland and Falb and gave McFarland access to debit cards and accounts.
But on Sept. 20, 2022, McFarland wrote to his attorney, Harlan Protass, alleging that Taylor had misrepresented his criminal charges to McFarland when the men became friends in prison and alleged that McFarland had only recently learned about the true nature of Taylor’s crimes.
“I am uncomfortable having any association with Mr. Taylor,” McFarland wrote in the email, obtained by Billboard. “After receiving the documents from his attorneys on Saturday, I acted swiftly and scheduled a meeting with Mr. Taylor on Monday. I proceeded to meet with him yesterday (Monday) and I notified him that we must sever ties.”
At the end of the meeting, Taylor demanded the repayment of the money he had paid to McFarland, but McFarland explained that the money had already been spent, according to an email from Taylor to his attorney obtained by Billboard.
In the same email exchange, Taylor revealed that the payment made to McFarland was tied to a number of unfinished projects McFarland had offered as collateral for the loan, including a memoir of McFarland’s life, a documentary on McFarland’s efforts to launch PYRT and a proposed celebrity boxing match between McFarland and his former business partner, Ja Rule.
On Oct. 27, lawyers for McFarland offered to pay Taylor $1 million to buy out his equity interest in PYRT by making “payments in the amount of 5% of its gross revenues up to $1 million,” wrote McFarland attorney Craig Effrain in a document obtained by Billboard.
Taylor rejected the offer and demanded the immediate repayment of what he then said was a $640,000 loan plus $5 million paid out over a two-year period, according to copies of email communications.
McFarland didn’t respond to the counteroffer and stopped responding to communications from Taylor’s attorneys, emails from Taylor to his attorney show.
In July, McFarland took to TikTok to announce that he was pausing the PYRT concept to form a new LLC, Fyre Holdings, for Fyre Fest 2. In July, he emailed potential investors announcing that he was looking to raise $2 million.
“I’m a master at raising the tide, and I’ve already created a tidal wave,” he wrote in the July 6 email obtained by Billboard. “As demonstrated throughout history, the business opportunity is to steer our ship dead center into the wave and use its push to conquer the market.”
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit accusing The Rolling Stones members Mick Jagger and Keith Richards of copying their 2020 single “Living in a Ghost Town” from a pair of little-known songs, ruling that the case was clearly filed in the wrong court.
Filed in March by songwriter Sergio Garcia Fernandez (stage name Angelslang), the copyright infringement lawsuit claimed that Jagger and Richards “misappropriated many of the recognizable and key protected elements” from his 2006 song “So Sorry” as well as his 2007 tune “Seed of God.”
But in a decision Wednesday (Oct. 18), Judge Eldon E. Fallon ruled that his Louisiana federal court lacked jurisdiction over Fernandez’s case. In doing so, he pointed out that Jagger and Richards are Brits, Fernandez lives in Spain, and The Rolling Stones have “only performed in New Orleans four times.”
“The mere fact that people in this district listen to the Rolling Stones or the alleged work does not permit this court to wield specific jurisdiction over the defendants,” Judge Fallon wrote in dismissing the case.
The judge only tossed the case “without prejudice” — meaning Fernandez is free to re-file the lawsuit in a more appropriate location. In the lead-up to Wednesday’s ruling, lawyers for The Rolling Stones argued that the case should have been filed somewhere in Europe.
In a statement to Billboard, Fernandez’s lawyer said he’s “disappointed and stunned by the court’s ruling.” But he vowed to “refile the lawsuit in a different venue in addition to reviewing other legal options.”
Released at the peak of the COVID-19 shutdowns in April 2020, “Living in a Ghost Town” was the first original material released by the Stones since 2012. The song, a blues-rock tune with reggae influences accompanied by a COVID-themed video, reached No. 3 on the Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart in May 2020.
In his lawsuit, Fernandez alleged that the new track was created by borrowing key features from his two earlier songs, including vocal melodies, chord progressions and other elements. “Defendants never paid plaintiff, nor secured the authorization for the use of ‘So Sorry’ and ‘Seed of God,’” his lawyers wrote at the time.
How would members of the iconic band have heard those songs, which have less than 1,000 spins on Spotify? Fernandez claims he gave a demo CD to “an immediate family member” of Jagger.
“The immediate family member … confirmed receipt … to the plaintiff via e-mail, and expressed that the musical works of the plaintiff and its style was a sound The Rolling Stones would be interested in using,” Fernandez’s lawyers wrote.
When the case was first filed, experts told Billboard that it was unlikely to succeed. Joe Bennett, a forensic musicologist and a professor at Berklee College of Music, said the songs shared only an overall vibe — based on mid-tempo rock grooves in the key of A minor — that’s been ubiquitous in rock and blues since the beginning.
“The Stones didn’t copy from Fernandez, because they didn’t need to,” Bennett said. “They’ve been playing grooves like this for a very long time, as have many others.”
Megan Thee Stallion has reached a settlement to end her legal war with her former record label 1501 Certified Entertainment.
After more than three years of litigation over a record deal she calls “unconscionable,” attorneys for 1501 announced Thursday that the two sides had “mutually reached a confidential settlement to resolve their legal differences.” Under the deal, Megan and 1501 will “amicably part ways.”
“Both Megan and 1501 are pleased to put this matter behind them and move forward with the next chapter of their respective businesses,” 1501 said. In the same statement, the label’s president Carl Crawford said that he and his company “wish Megan the very best in her life and career.”
Specific terms of the deal, including whether any money changed hands, were not disclosed.
The star rapper (real name Megan Pete) has been fighting with 1501 for more than three years, claiming the company duped the young artist into signing an unfair record deal in 2018 that was well-below industry standards. She says that when she signed a new management deal with Jay-Z’s Roc Nation in 2019, she got “real lawyers” who helped her see that the deal was “crazy.”
That core dispute has mushroomed into additional litigation. Megan filed the latest case in February 2022, claiming 1501 was refusing to count her 2021 Something for Thee Hotties as an “album” – a key distinction, since she must produce three albums under her record deal. 1501 quickly countersued, arguing that Thee Hotties contained just only 29 minutes of original material.
In August 2022, Megan filed a new complaint seeking more than $1 million in damages. The new filing says 1501 “systematically failed” to pay enough royalties and had “wrongfully allowed for excessive marketing and promotion charges.” Again, 1501 quickly struck back, calling the damages demand “baseless” and arguing that it was actually Megan who owes “millions of dollars.”
A judge ruled last December that the case would need to be decided by a jury trial, but any actual courthouse showdown had been repeatedly pushed back as the parties continued to battle in court over other issues, like whether Roc Nation CEO Desiree Perez would need to sit for a deposition. In April, Megan leveled new allegations that 1501 draining its bank accounts in an effort to avoid paying eventual damages.
Last week, Megan hinted that some kind of settlement could be in the offing, saying during an Instagram live stream that “I have no label right now.”
Cesar Pina, a celebrity house-flipper with close ties to New York City radio host DJ Envy, was arrested Wednesday (Oct. 18) on federal charges that he perpetrated “a multimillion-dollar Ponzi-like investment fraud scheme.”
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The charges come after months of social media accusations and civil litigation against Pina, who victims say stole their money with promises of big profits. DJ Envy (real name RaaShaun Casey) has been caught up in the scheme because critics say he helped promote Pina, including through appearances on his nationally syndicated hip-hop radio show The Breakfast Club — accusations he denies.
In announcing the charges, federal authorities said Pina had “exploited celebrity status and social media to develop a devoted following of potential victims.”
“Promising returns that were too good to be true, Pina allegedly defrauded dozens of people of millions of dollars,” New Jersey U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger said in a statement. “Our office is committed to protecting the public from these schemes and prosecuting those who lie to investors for their own personal gain.”
DJ Envy is not named in the charges and is not accused of any criminal wrongdoing. But federal prosecutors specifically noted that Pina “partnered with a celebrity disc jockey and radio personality” — listed in the charges as “Individual-1” — to boost his reputation as a real estate guru.
“Together, they used Individual-l’s celebrity to promote various real estate enterprises that Pina controlled,” prosecutors wrote in the criminal complaint. “Pina represented that he was a highly successful real estate investor, owned thousands of properties in multiple states, and had business relationships with numerous celebrities.”
Attorneys for both Pina and Envy did not return requests for comment.
The accusations against Pina first cropped up in May, when an Instagram account accused him of defrauding numerous investors — and accused Envy of playing a key role. That led to a flood of civil lawsuits from dozens of victims who say Pina owed them thousands or millions of dollars. One victim’s attorney estimated that more than 30 investors have already come forward, seeking over $40 million from Pina and his wife, Jennifer.
Many of those lawsuits, including one filed by music industry veteran Anthony Martini, name DJ Envy as a co-defendant, citing their close ties — including Pina’s frequent appearances on The Breakfast Club and a series of real estate seminars that the two men co-hosted. One case says Envy “aided and abetted” the fraudsters by “using his public likeness as a well-known radio disc jockey to promote their real estate scheme.”
Envy says those kinds of allegations are not only false — he says he himself is also a victim of Pina’s alleged scheme — but also defamatory. He’s suing the social media influencer who first publicized the allegations, claiming he “spewed” lies to promote his own real estate business, and he’s demanding to be dismissed from the investor lawsuits.
In an interview with Billboard last week, Envy’s lawyer, Massimo F. D’Angelo, said his client had nothing to do with the specific deals involved in Pina’s alleged scheme and was being targeted by lawyers and critics who were “sensationalizing” the case by involving a celebrity: “Envy had no involvement whatsoever. The only reason he’s being dragged into this is because he’s a public figure.”
Read the full complaint against Pina here.
Universal Music Group (UMG) and other music companies are suing an artificial intelligence platform called Anthropic PBC for using copyrighted song lyrics to “train” its software — marking the first major lawsuit in what is expected to be a key legal battle over the future of AI music.
In a complaint filed Wednesday morning (Oct. 18) in Nashville federal court, lawyers for UMG, Concord Music Group, ABKCO and other music publishers accused Anthropic of violating the companies’ copyrights en masse by using vast numbers of songs to help 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.”
A spokesperson for Anthropic did not immediately return a request for comment.
The new lawsuit is similar to cases filed by visual artists over the unauthorized use of their works to train AI image generators, as well as cases filed by authors like Game of Thrones writer George R.R. Martin and novelist John Grisham over the use of their books. But it’s the first to squarely target music.
AI models like the popular ChatGPT are “trained” to produce new content by feeding them vast quantities of existing works known as “inputs.” In the case of AI music, that process involves huge numbers of songs. 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.
Major music companies and other industry players have already argued that such training is illegal. Last year, the RIAA said that any use of copyrighted songs to build AI platforms “infringes our members’ rights.” In April, when UMG asked Spotify and other streamers in April to stop allowing AI companies to use their platforms to ingest music, it said it “will not hesitate to take steps to protect our rights.”
On Wednesday, the company took those steps. In the lawsuit, it said Anthropic “profits richly” from the “vast troves of copyrighted material that Anthropic scrapes from the internet.”
“Unlike songwriters, who are creative by nature, Anthropic’s AI models are not creative — they depend entirely on the creativity of others,” lawyers for the publishers wrote. “Yet, Anthropic pays nothing to publishers, their songwriters, or the countless other copyright owners whose copyrighted works Anthropic uses to train its AI models. Anthropic has never even attempted to license the use of Publishers’ lyrics.”
In the case ahead, the key battle line will be over whether the unauthorized use of proprietary music to train an AI platform is nonetheless legal under copyright’s fair use doctrine — an important rule that allows people to reuse protected works without breaking the law.
Historically, fair use enabled critics to quote from the works they were dissecting, or parodists to use existing materials to mock them. But more recently, it’s also empowered new technologies: In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the VCR was protected by fair use; in 2007, a federal appeals court ruled that Google Image search was fair use.
In Wednesday’s complaint, UMG and the other publishers seemed intent on heading off any kind of fair use defense. They argued that Anthropic’s behavior would harm the market for licensing lyrics to AI services that actually pay for licenses — a key consideration in any fair use analysis.
“Anthropic is depriving Publishers and their songwriters of control over their copyrighted works and the hard-earned benefits of their creative endeavors, it is competing unfairly against those website developers that respect the copyright law and pay for licenses, and it is undermining existing and future licensing markets in untold ways,” the publishers wrote.
In addition to targeting Anthropic’s use of songs as inputs, the publishers claim that the material produced by the company’s AI model also infringes their lyrics: “Anthropic’s AI models generate identical or nearly identical copies of those lyrics, in clear violation of publishers’ copyrights.”
Such litigation might only be the first step in setting national policy on how AI platforms can use copyrighted music, with legislative efforts close behind. At a hearing in May, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) repeatedly grilled the CEO of the company behind ChatGPT about how he and others planned to “compensate the artist.”
“If I can go in and say ‘write me a song that sounds like Garth Brooks,’ and it takes part of an existing song, there has to be compensation to that artist for that utilization and that use,” Blackburn said. “If it was radio play, it would be there. If it was streaming, it would be there.”
Dr. Luke and the estate of the late Juice WRLD are facing a copyright lawsuit that claims they unfairly cut out one of the co-writers of the rapper’s 2021 track “Not Enough.”
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The case, filed in California federal court Tuesday, claims that an artist named PD Beats (Pierre Orpheus DeJournette) is a credited co-writer of the song, but that Dr. Luke (Lukasz Sebastian Gottwald) and the estate of Juice WRLD (Jarad Anthony Higgins) have refused to treat him as co-owner of the copyright.
“Defendants have released, marketed, distributed, and monetized the subject song without accrediting or providing PD Beats his proportional share of the revenue,” his lawyers wrote in their complaint. “Defendants have failed to meaningfully respond, necessitating this action.”
DeJournette claims that he contributed “original guitar, performance, and production” to “Not Enough,” in addition to “writing the beats and programming the 808s” – a reference to the Roland TR-808 drum machine. Without the material he added, DeJournette says the song would be “missing key elements that form the basis of the subject song’s audience appeal.”
The lawsuit claims that DeJournette was listed as a co-writer in certain credits – although he doesn’t specify where – and that he and the other writers should “equally own the copyrights.” His lawsuit asks for a judicial declaration that he is indeed a co-owner, and a court-ordered accounting of the song’s revenue.
Reps for Dr. Luke and Juice WRLD’s estate did not immediately return requests for comment on Wednesday.
Juice WRLD, a pioneering voice in emo rap and SoundCloud rap, died of a drug overdose in December 2019 while onboard a private jet flying from Los Angeles to Chicago. Citing law enforcement sources, TMZ reported days later that the rapper swallowed a large number of pills to hide them from federal agents who were waiting for the plane to land.
Released on his posthumous 2021 album Fighting Demons, “Not Enough” spent a week at No. 80 on the Hot 100. The album itself was a bigger hit, spending 72 weeks on the Billboard 200 and peaking at No. 2.
Tuesday’s lawsuit named Juice WRLD’s mother, Carmella Wallace, as a defendant because she serves as the executor of his estate, as well as a company called Juice WRLD Music LLC. Other defendants included co-writers CB Mix (Chris Barnett) and KBeaZy (Keegan Christopher Bach); Universal Music Group, which released the song under its Interscope Records imprint; and Opus Music Group, which acquired a majority stake in Juice WRLD’s catalog in 2022.
Six months after ex-Fugees rapper Prakazrel “Pras” Michel was convicted on foreign lobbying charges, he’s now demanding a new trial — making the extraordinary claim that his ex-lawyer used an unproven artificial intelligence (AI) tool to craft closing arguments because he owned a stake in the tech platform.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In a Monday (Oct. 16) filing in D.C. federal court, Michel claimed attorney David Kenner “utterly failed” him during the April trial, denying him his constitutional right to effective counsel. Among other shortcomings, the rapper said Kenner outsourced prep work to “inexperienced contract attorneys” and “failed to object to damaging and inadmissible testimony” during the trial.
Most unusual of all, Michel accused Kenner of using “an experimental artificial intelligence program” to draft his closing arguments for the trial, resulting in a deeply flawed presentation. And he claimed Kenner did so because he had an “undisclosed financial stake” in the company and wanted to use Michel’s trial to promote it.
“Michel never had a chance,” the rapper’s new lawyers wrote Monday. “Michel’s counsel was deficient throughout, likely more focused on promoting his AI program … than zealously defending Michel. The net effect was an unreliable verdict.”
Kenner did not immediately return a request for comment on Tuesday.
Michel was charged in 2019 with funneling money from a now-fugitive Malaysian financier through straw donors to Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. He was also accused of trying to squelch a Justice Department investigation and influence an extradition case on behalf of China under the Trump administration.
In April, following a trial that included testimony from actor Leonardo DiCaprio and former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Michel was convicted on 10 counts including conspiracy, witness tampering and failing to register as an agent of China.
During that trial, Michel was represented by Kenner, a well-known Los Angeles criminal defense attorney who has previously repped hip-hop luminaries like Snoop Dogg, Suge Knight and, most recently, Tory Lanez. But earlier this summer, Michel asked for permission to replace Kenner with a new team of lawyers; in August, Kenner and his firm were swapped out for lawyers from the national firm ArentFox Schiff.
Now, it’s clear why. In Monday’s filing, Michel’s new lawyers accused Kenner of wide-ranging failures — including many that have nothing to do with AI tools or secret motives. They claim he “outsourced trial preparations” to other lawyers and “failed to familiarize himself with the charged statutes or required elements.” They also say he “overlooked nearly every colorable defense” and “failed to object to damaging and inadmissible testimony, betraying a failure to understand the rules of evidence.”
But the most unusual allegations concerned an alleged scheme to promote EyeLevel.AI, a computer program designed to help attorneys win cases by digesting trial transcripts and other data. Days after the trial concluded, the company put out a press release highlighting its use in the Michel trial, calling it the “first use of generative AI in a federal trial” and quoting Kenner.
“This is an absolute game changer for complex litigation,” Kenner said in the press release. “The system turned hours or days of legal work into seconds. This is a look into the future of how cases will be conducted.”
But according to Michel’s new lawyers, Kenner’s use of the program was harmful, not helpful, to his client’s case. They say it may have led to some smaller mistakes, like Kenner misattributing a Puff Daddy song to the Fugees, but also to massive legal errors, like conflating separate allegations against Michel — an error that Michel’s new lawyers say caused Kenner to make “frivolous” arguments before the jury.
“At bottom, the AI program failed Kenner, and Kenner failed Michel,” Michel’s attorneys at ArentFox Schiff wrote. “The closing argument was deficient, unhelpful, and a missed opportunity that prejudiced the defense.”
According to Michel’s new lawyers, the mistake of using the AI tools was compounded by Kenner’s alleged motive: an undisclosed ownership stake in the startup that sells it. By using a criminal trial as a means to promote a product, Monday’s filing says Kenner created “an extraordinary conflict of interest.”
“Kenner and [his partner]’s decision to elevate their financial interest in the AI program over Michel’s interest in a competent and vigorous defense adversely affected Kenner’s trial performance, as the closing argument was frivolous, missed nearly every colorable argument, and damaged the defense,” they wrote.
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 deep dive into allegations that NYC radio host DJ Envy was complicit in a multi-million dollar real estate scam; country star Maren Morris files for divorce; an explainer on the battle between Coldplay and its longtime manager; an interview with legendary music lawyer Don Passman; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Top NYC Radio DJ In Hot Water
After news broke last week that DJ Envy, the co-host of the nationally-syndicated hip-hop radio show The Breakfast Club, was accused of taking part in a real estate scam, Billboard dove deep into the complex web of lawsuits, countersuits and bankruptcies that lay out the full picture of the allegations.
In at least 20 civil cases filed in recent months, dozens of investors claim that Cesar Pina and wife Jennifer Pina — New Jersey house-flippers with famous friends — took their money with promises of big profits only to return little or nothing. Lawyers for some of the alleged victims estimate that more than 30 investors have already come forward, seeking over $40 million from the Pinas.
Many of those lawsuits name DJ Envy (RaaShaun Casey) as a co-defendant, citing his close ties to Pina and claiming he used his platform to lend legitimacy to the alleged schemers. One case says Envy “aided and abetted” the fraudsters by “using his public likeness as a well-known radio disc jockey to promote their real estate scheme.”
Envy says those kinds of allegations are not only false — he says he himself is also a victim of Pina’s alleged scheme — but also defamatory. He’s suing the social media influencer who first publicized the claims, claiming he “spewed” lies to promote his own real estate business, and he’s demanding to be dismissed from the investor lawsuits.
Who is Cesar Pina? What are he and Envy accused of doing? What comes next? For the full story, go read our entire deep-dive on the messy scandal.
Other top stories this week…
COLDPLAY LEGAL BATTLE EXPLAINED – With Coldplay involved in a nasty back-and-forth legal battle against former manager Dave Holmes, Billboard’s London correspondent Richard Smirke pored over all the legal docs and broke down everything we’ve learned from the allegations – like the band’s claim that it incurred $21.5 million in touring costs overruns because of Holmes.
LAWMAKERS TARGET AI FAKES – A bipartisan group of U.S. senators released draft legislation aimed at protecting musical artists and others from artificial intelligence-generated deepfakes and other replicas of their likeness, like the infamous “Fake Drake” song released this spring. The so-called NO FAKES Act, which would create a federal right for artists, actors and others to sue those who create “digital replicas” of their image, voice, or visual likeness without permission, is one of the first concrete legislative proposals in the wake of the sudden growth of AI tools over the past year.
DON PASSMAN INTERVIEW – The legendary music lawyer sat down to chat with with Billboard’s Glenn Peoples, talking about the challenges and opportunities posed by AI; about labels “bidding against each other out of FOMO”; about how he thinks artists “now have a lot of power to demand things that they’ve never gotten before in history”; and about his “philosophy” on the catalog sale mania: “For most people, I think it’s a mistake, and I try to talk them out of it.” Go read the full interview here.
MAREN MORRIS DIVORCE – The country star filed for divorce from husband Ryan Hurd after five years of marriage, saying that she and Hurd were “unable to live together successfully as husband and wife” and were “experiencing irreconcilable differences in their marriage.”
SONOS VERDICT OVERTURNED – Five months after Sonos won a whopping $32 million patent infringement judgment against Google over smart speaker technology, a federal judge overturned it on the grounds that the patents involved in the case were invalid. And he didn’t mince words: “This was not a case of an inventor leading the industry to something new. This was a case of the industry leading with something new and, only then, an inventor coming out of the woodwork to say that he had come up with the idea first — wringing fresh claims to read on a competitor’s products from an ancient application.”
MOBB DEEP SUED OVER LOGO – Mobb Deep and the streetwear brand Supreme hit were hit with a trademark lawsuit over their recent collaboration on t-shirts, filed by a New York City hardcore punk band (Sick of It All) that claims that the legendary hip hop duo stole their dragon-shaped logo. Apparently, the two musical acts have been quietly battling over their nearly-identical logos for decades.