Legal News
Page: 8
Warner Music Group has filed a lawsuit against Crumbl, the Utah-based cookie company, for copyright infringement. The lawsuit, filed on April 22 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, accuses Crumbl of using WMG’s copyrighted sound recordings and musical compositions in its social media marketing campaigns without proper licenses.
Crumbl has built its brand primarily through social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram, often featuring popular music tracks in its promotional content. WMG claims that Crumbl has misappropriated at least 159 sound recordings and musical compositions in its videos. These tracks, which include works by artists such as Lizzo, Mariah Carey, Ariana Grande and Beyoncé, are said to be key to Crumbl’s marketing strategy. Many of these videos rely heavily on music, with little to no dialogue, highlighting the central role of the unlicensed tracks in Crumbl’s advertising efforts.
WMG’s complaint provides several examples of this alleged misappropriation. For instance, Crumbl’s TikTok video promoting its blueberry cheesecake features the unauthorized use of “Blueberry Faygo” by Lil Mosey, the label said. Another video promoting Crumbl’s yellow sugar cookie, while also advertising the film Minions: The Rise of Gru, uses Coldplay’s “Yellow” without permission. A video promoting a butter cake cookie features — you guessed it — BTS’ “Butter.” Additionally, there’s a video featuring Crumbl employees dancing to K CAMP’s “Lottery (Renegade),” and Crumbl even referenced music used in some videos, such as a TikTok post featuring Lizzo’s “Juice,” with the caption repeating the song’s lyrics.
Trending on Billboard
Other songs that WMG contends were infringed upon by Crumbl include Beyoncé’s “Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It),” Bruno Mars’ “Locked Out of Heaven,” Dua Lipa’s “Levitating,” George Michael’s “Careless Whisper,” Gwen Stefani’s “Holdback Girl,” Gotye’s “Somebody That I Used to Know,” Taylor Swift’s “All Too Well,” Miley Cyrus’ “Party in the U.S.A.,” Missy Elliott’s “Get Ur Freak On,” Mariah Carey’s “Fantasy” and dozens more.
WMG asserts that Crumbl’s actions constitute direct, contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. The plaintiffs argue that Crumbl, which has over a thousand stores nationwide and is reportedly exploring a sale, according to Reuters, should have been aware of the need to secure licenses for the music used in its promotional materials. Despite this, Crumbl allegedly persisted in using WMG’s music without authorization, even after similar cases, including separate lawsuits against Bang Energy by Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment, brought attention to the overarching issue.
The lawsuit seeks a jury trial and a permanent injunction to prevent Crumbl from any further infringement. The company is also pursuing statutory damages of up to $150,000 for each infringed work, potentially totaling nearly $24 million if the court awards the maximum penalty for all 159 cited works.
This legal action underscores the music industry’s ongoing efforts to protect intellectual property rights in the digital age, particularly as brands increasingly leverage popular music in social media marketing. The outcome of this case could have broader implications for how companies approach the use of copyrighted music in online promotions.
WMG is being represented by Sidley Austin LLP and Workman Nydegger.
Crumbl has not responded to Billboard‘s request for comment on WMG’s lawsuit.
A songwriter who unsuccessfully sued Mariah Carey over “All I Want for Christmas is You” is pleading with a judge to reject demands that he repay her six-figure legal bill, warning it would push an “elderly man” to “the brink of a financial collapse.”
After beating Vince Vance’s copyright lawsuit over her holiday classic, Carey, Sony Music and other defendants told the judge earlier this month that they had paid nearly $186,000 to a team of lawyers to defeat “frivolous” motions advanced by Vance’s attorneys.
But in a response filing on Monday, Vance’s lawyers said that such a award was “simply not reasonable” and completely out of proportion for the amount of litigation at issue – and that it could bankrupt an an “elderly man now without vast resources.”
Trending on Billboard
“The plaintiff is elder and living off his music catalog and some touring,” the songwriter’s attorneys say. “One artist should not push another artist to the brink of a financial collapse.”
Vance (real name Andy Stone) first sued Carey in 2022, claiming “All I Want” infringed the copyrights to a 1989 song of the exact same name by his Vince Vance and the Valiants. He said his track had received “extensive airplay” during the 1993 holiday season — a year before Carey released her now-better-known hit.
The case was a big deal because Carey’s song is big business. The 1994 hit, which became even more popular after it appeared in the 2003 holiday rom-com Love Actually, has re-taken the top spot on the Hot 100 for six straight years and earned a whopping $8.5 million in revenue in 2022.
But in a ruling last month, Judge Mónica Ramírez Almadani said Vance had failed to show that the songs were similar enough to violate copyright law. She cited analysis by a musicologist who said the two tracks were “very different songs” that shared only “commonplace Christmas song clichés” that had been used in many earlier tracks.
The judge not only tossed out Vance’s case, but also ruled that he and his lawyers should be punished for advancing meritless arguments that the judge said were aimed to “cause unnecessary delay and needlessly increase the costs of litigation.”
Earlier this month, Carey and the other defendants told the judge they had paid a combined $185,602.30 for a total of 295 hours to defeat those motions. They said they spent a lot because Vance was demanding “drastic” thing, like $20 million in damages and the “destruction” of all copies of Carey’s song.
Carey, repped by Peter Anderson and others from the law firm Davis Wright Tremaine, asked for about $141,000; Walter Afanasieff, a co-writer on Carey’s track repped by Kenneth D. Freundlich, asked for $7,000; Sony Music, represented by Benjamin Akley, Donald Zakarin, Ilene Farkas and others from Pryor Cashman, asked for $32,000; and Kobalt, repped by Bert Deixler and others from Kendall Brill & Kelly LLP, asked for $5,000.
But in Tuesday’s response, Vance’s lawyer (Gerard P. Fox) said those demands were far too high for a case that he said had been filed with good intentions and sound legal reasoning.
“He heard something that to him seemed substantially similar and spent money that is sparse for him on two of the top musicologists in the country and asked them for their independent opinions, and they both gave him the same opinion: there was infringement,” Fox writes.
“The loss of this case … is staggering enough for this plaintiff and saddling him with $185,000 of big law firm billing that is unreasonable and forcing him to sell parts of his catalogue of music will accomplish nothing,” the lawyer writes.
Jay-Z’s rape accuser wants a federal judge to dismiss his defamation lawsuit against her, arguing she cannot be sued over allegations she made in court – and that a headline-grabbing NBC News interview is protected under the same legal logic.
In a court motion filed Tuesday, attorneys for the Jane Doe accuser and her attorney, Tony Buzbee, argued that her shocking accusations against the rapper were covered by the “fair report privilege” – a legal doctrine that largely bars defamation cases over allegations made during legal proceedings.
Jay-Z’s lawsuit – filed in March after Doe dropped her case against him – claims that she also defamed him by making similar allegations during an interview with NBC News. But in her new motion, she says those statements are also covered by the “fair report” protections.
Trending on Billboard
“The average person watching the report, and indeed anyone watching the report, would certainly understand that the statements refer to allegations in the lawsuit,” her lawyers write.
The case against Jay-Z, filed in December, claimed that he and Sean “Diddy” Combs had drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl at an after-party following the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. Jay-Z forcefully denied the allegations, calling them a “blackmail attempt.” After just two months of heated litigation, Doe dropped her case without a settlement payment.
Weeks after the case was dropped, Jay-Z sued both Doe and Buzbee for defamation, malicious prosecution and other wrongdoing, claiming they had carried out an “evil conspiracy” to extort a settlement from him by making the “false and malicious” rape allegations.
“Mr. Carter does not commence this action lightly,” his lawyers wrote in the lawsuit, filed in Alabama federal court. “But the extortion and abuse of Mr. Carter by Doe and her lawyers must stop.”
In Tuesday’s motion to dismiss that case, attorneys for Doe and Buzbee argued that they cannot be sued because they had made such statements in court. And they said the “fair report” privilege also clearly applies to the NBC interview, even if Doe gave statements that weren’t exactly the same as the claims she had raised in court.
“It is immaterial that the NBC News piece does not preface every statement with a reference to Doe’s amended complaint,” her lawyers write. “Doe’s statements in the NBC News piece are substantially the same as the allegations of her underlying amended complaint, even if they are not identical.”
Attorneys for Doe and Buzbee also argued that the other claims in Jay-Z’s case are similarly faulty, saying he has not “come close” to showing that he can sue for malicious prosecution. A representative for Jay-Z did not immediately return a request for comment.
The Alabama lawsuit is part of a sprawling legal battle between Jay-Z and Buzbee in the wake of the rape allegation. A separate case in California, in which Jay-Z is suing the lawyer for extortion and defamation, is awaiting an early-stage ruling by a judge. Buzbee has also filed his own cases against both Jay-Z’s Roc Nation and his longtime law firm, Quinn Emanuel, alleging they have harassed his clients and committed other wrongdoing.
Eminem’s publisher is dropping a lawsuit that claimed a Detroit-area Ford dealership stole “Lose Yourself” for TikTok videos that warned viewers they “only get one shot” to buy a special edition truck.
Less than three months after Eight Mile Style sued LaFontaine Ford St. Clair for copyright infringement over the social media ads, the music company told a judge Tuesday (April 22) that it would voluntarily dismiss the case permanently.
Court documents did not offer any explanation for the move, giving no indication whether a settlement had been reached or if the case was simply being dropped. Neither side immediately returned requests for comment.
Trending on Billboard
Eight Mile, which owns the copyrights to “Lose Yourself” and other Eminem songs, filed the case in January, accusing LaFontaine Ford — which owns several dealerships near Eminem’s hometown — of blasting the song in the social media videos even though “at no time” did it get a license to do so.
“This is an action for willful copyright infringement … against LaFontaine for its unauthorized use of the composition in online advertisements for one or more car dealerships in blatant disregard of the exclusive rights vested in Eight Mile,” the company’s attorneys wrote.
The lawsuit claimed the videos, which allegedly appeared on TikTok, Instagram and Facebook in September and October, used “Lose Yourself” to boost a special Detroit Lions-themed Ford truck, telling viewers: “With only 800 produced, you only get one shot to own a Special Edition Detroit Lions 2024 PowerBoost Hybrid F-150.”
Eminem doesn’t own Eight Mile Style and was not involved in the lawsuit.
Social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram provide huge libraries of licensed music for users to easily add to their videos. But there’s a key exception: The songs can’t be used for commercial or promotional videos posted by brands. That kind of content requires a separate “synch” license, just like any conventional advertisement on TV.
That crucial distinction has led to numerous lawsuits in recent years. The restaurant chain Chili’s has been sued twice for using copyrighted songs in social videos, once by the Beastie Boys over “Sabotage” and again by Universal Music Group for allegedly using more than 60 songs from Ariana Grande, Justin Bieber and many others. The hotel chain Marriott and more than a dozen NBA teams have also recently faced copyright lawsuits over the same thing.
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 breakdown of the many lawyers working on the Sean “Diddy” Combs litigation; a motion by Lil Durk to dismiss his federal murder-for-hire charges; an updated version of Drake’s lawsuit against Universal Music Group focused on the Super Bowl; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: The Diddy Debacle’s Many, Many Lawyers
To lead off Billboard’s annual Top Music Lawyers list, I dove deep into the many attorneys involved in the litigation against Sean “Diddy” Combs over his alleged sexual abuse.
Trending on Billboard
Spread across a complex criminal case and dozens of civil lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, the Combs litigation unsurprisingly involves a slew of high-powered lawyers, ranging from veteran defense attorneys to experienced sex-crimes prosecutors to a prolific plaintiff’s lawyer who says he represents more than 100 victims. And that’s not even mentioning the BigLaw attorneys hired to defend top industry players who have been dragged — they say wrongly — into the messy litigation.
For the whole story, which covers more than 20 lawyers in all, go read my full article here. And make sure not to miss the actual Top Lawyers list after that, detailing the top music industry attorneys who are making deals, guiding clients and watching out for AI.
Other top stories this week…
IF THE SONG DOESN’T FIT – Lil Durk asked a federal judge to dismiss murder-for-hire charges, claiming prosecutors are citing song lyrics as evidence even though he wrote them more than six months before the alleged crime. Prosecutors had claimed last year that the Chicago drill star rapped about ordering his “OTF” crew to murder rival Quando Rondo, but his lawyers said that claim was “demonstrably false” and that the feds used such evidence to mislead a grand jury: “Unless the government is prosecuting Banks on a theory of extra-sensory prescience, the lyrics could not have soundly informed the grand jury’s finding of probable cause,” Durks lawyers wrote.
DRAKE v. UMG UPDATE – Drake filed an amended complaint in his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” focusing heavily on the Super Bowl halftime show that took place after the original case was filed. Drake’s lawyers say the decision to censor the word “pedophile” during the broadcast had actually helped his case: “Kendrick Lamar would not have been permitted to perform during the Super Bowl Performance unless the word ‘pedophile’… was omitted from the lyrics — that is because nearly everyone understands that it is defamatory to falsely brand someone a ‘certified pedophile’,” the star’s lawyers wrote.
LEGAL R.I.P. – Music attorney Joel Katz, for decades one of the industry’s most powerful figures, died last week at the age of 80. A longtime practice group chair at the firm Greenberg Traurig, Katz represented a who’s who of top music executives over his career, as well as major artists (Willie Nelson, Jimmy Buffett, Tim McGraw) and industry groups (Recording Academy and Country Music Association). After Recording Academy head Deb Dugan accused Katz of sexual harassment in 2020 — an allegation he denied — he joined Barnes & Thornburg in 2021, where he spent the rest of his career. Go read Melinda Newman’s full obituary here, featuring reactions from around the industry.
DIDDY TRIAL DELAY DENIED – Judge Arun Subramanian denied a request by Diddy to delay his sex trafficking and racketeering trial by two months, ruling that the move was made too close to trial. The star’s lawyers had argued they didn’t have enough time to prepare for trial after prosecutors added new charges earlier this month. But the judge ruled that the new indictment largely overlapped with earlier charging papers, telling Diddy’s lawyers he found it “unclear why there isn’t sufficient time to prepare.”
SMOKING GUN OR ‘UNRELIABLE’? – Elsewhere in Diddy-world, his lawyers asked the judge to exclude the infamous 2016 surveillance video of him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura from the trial, arguing it would “unfairly confuse and mislead the jury.” They claim the clip was edited by CNN and then the original was destroyed, leaving only an “inaccurate, unreliable video” to play for jurors: “The manipulation of the videos was specifically designed to inflame the passions of CNN’s viewing audience, and that is what the government is hoping to leverage in this case.”
DISASTER DEPOSITION – Megan Thee Stallion asked a federal judge to hold Tory Lanez in contempt of court over “disruptive” and “inflammatory” behavior during a recent deposition in a civil lawsuit. Lanez — currently serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting Megan — made a “mockery of the proceedings” by harassing a female lawyer and demanding definitions of basic terms. The motion came in a defamation case Megan filed against gossip blogger Milagro Gramz, who she claims has waged a “coordinated campaign” with Lanez to “defame and delegitimize” the superstar rapper in the wake of the shooting and trial.
DANCE DANCE LITIGATION – A TikTok user named Kelley Heyer, who says she created last summer’s viral “Apple dance” to a Charli XCX song, is suing Roblox over allegations that the company violated copyright law by selling her dance moves as an “emote.” Heyer claims that other games paid her for a license, but that Roblox used her moves without a deal. The lawsuit is the latest in a long line of cases filed over viral dance moves that are used in video games.
Lil Durk wants a judge to dismiss murder-for-hire charges he’s facing over a 2022 shooting, claiming the feds gave “false evidence” to a grand jury by citing song lyrics that he wrote more than six months before the attack ever took place.
Prosecutors charged the Chicago drill star (Durk Banks) last year over allegations that ordered his “OTF” crew to murder rival Quando Rondo in – accusations they backed up by quoting lyrics from a song called “Wonderful Wayne & Jackie Boy” that allegedly referenced the shooting.
But in a motion to dismiss the case filed Friday, Durk’s attorneys said those lyrics could not possibly have made mention of the Rondo shooting because the rapper wrote them “seven months before the incident even happened.”
Trending on Billboard
“The government told the grand jury that Mr. Banks, through specific lyrics in his music, celebrated and profited from a revenge murder that he had ordered,” writes Durk’s lawyer Drew Findling. “That claim is demonstrably false.”
The allegedly incriminating lyrics came as a feature on a track released by Babyface Ray in December 2022 – three months after the Rondo shooting. But in their motion this week, Durk’s lawyer say he recorded his verses in January and had no subsequent involvement in the song. They cited sworn affidavits from two music producers who worked on “Wonderful Wayne,” who both said Durk made no edits to the lyrics after the shooting.
“Unless the government is prosecuting Banks on a theory of extra-sensory prescience, the lyrics could not have soundly informed the grand jury’s finding of probable cause,” Findling writes.
The use of rap music as evidence in criminal cases is controversial, as critics argue it threatens free speech and can sway juries by tapping into racial biases. Over the past few years, the practice has drawn backlash from the music industry and led to efforts by lawmakers to stop it. But it has continued largely unabated, most notably in the recent criminal case against Young Thug in Atlanta, in which prosecutors made extensive use of his music.
Durk was arrested in October on murder-for-hire and gun charges related to the September 2022 shooting at a Los Angeles gas station, which left Rondo (Tyquian Bowman) unscathed but saw friend Lul Pab (Saviay’a Robinson) killed in the crossfire.
Prosecutors say Durk’s Only The Family crew was not merely a well-publicized group of Chicago rappers, but a “hybrid organization” that also functioned as a criminal gang to carry out violent acts “at the direction” of Durk. One of them was the Rondo attack, the feds say, allegedly carried out in retaliation for the 2020 killing of rapper King Von (Dayvon Bennett), a close friend of Durk’s.
“Banks put a monetary bounty out for an individual with whom Banks was feuding named T.B.,” prosecutors wrote in the indictment, referring to Rondo by his initials. “Banks ordered T.B.’s murder and the hitmen used Banks and OTF-related finances to carry out the murder.”
In addition to Durk, prosecutors have also charged several alleged OTF members — Kavon London Grant, Deandre Dontrell Wilson and Asa Houston — as well as two other alleged Chicago gang members named Keith Jones and David Brian Lindsey.
To support those claims, prosecutors alleged that Durk “sought to commercialize” Lul Pub’s death by “rapping about his revenge” on Rondo: “Told me they got an addy (go, go)/ Got location (go, go)/ Green light (go, go, go, go, go),” Durk raps in the track. “Look on the news and see your son/You screamin’, “No, no” (pu–y).”
But in Friday’s motion to dismiss, Durk’s lawyers say that accusation is “patently false,” and that including them in the indictment is the kind of “egregious” prosecutorial conduct that requires the judge to toss the case entirely.
“A prosecutor who knowingly secures an indictment based upon false information, or who allows a falsely obtained indictment to persist, routs the grand jury from its central protective function,” Findling writes. “That is clearly what happened here.”
Durk’s indictment also alleged that “Wonderful Wayne” makes direct reference to a news clip filmed shortly after the shooting, in which Rondo can be heard screaming “no, no!” after seeing Lul Pab’s dead body. But his lawyers now say those were internet edits posted to YouTube, and that the audio from the news broadcast was not used in the original.
“Mr. Banks did not create these videos, and the government has failed to show any nexus between these manufactured video clips and Mr. Banks,” Finding says. “The internet users who posted the videos … are apparent ‘fan pages’ maintained by people with no affiliation to Mr. Banks.”
Dismissing criminal charges at the outset is a drastic step that courts rarely take. But Durks’ attorneys say the lyrics were the “linchpin” to the case against him, forming one of only two pieces of evidence that was presented to the grand jury that issued the indictment.
“For the grand jury not to have been substantially influenced by that evidence in its decision to indict is inconceivable,” Findling writes.
A Manhattan federal judge on Friday denied a bid by Sean “Diddy” Combs to delay his sex trafficking and racketeering trial by two months, ruling that the request was made too close to his trial date.
The star’s lawyers asked for the delay on Wednesday (April 16), arguing they didn’t have enough time to prepare for trial after prosecutors added new charges earlier this month. But according to Reuters, Judge Arun Subramanian denied that motion at a court hearing on Friday (April 18).
Endorsing an argument made by the prosecutors, Subramanian said that the new indictment largely overlapped with earlier charging papers. According to CNN, the judge told Combs’ lawyers that it was “unclear why there isn’t sufficient time to prepare.”
Friday’s ruling means that, barring any last-minute disruptions, jury selection will begin on May 5 and testimony will begin on May 12. Representatives for Combs’ legal team did not immediately return a request for comment.
Combs was indicted in September, charged with running a sprawling criminal operation that aimed to “fulfill his sexual desires” by subjecting numerous women to abuse. The case centers on elaborate “freak off” parties in which Combs and others would allegedly ply victims with drugs and then coerce them into having sex, as well as on alleged acts of violence to keep victims silent.
A trial has long been set to start in May. If convicted on all of the charges, which include sex trafficking and racketeering, Combs faces a potential life prison sentence.
In a letter to the judge filed Wednesday, the star’s lawyers claimed the feds were dragging their feet on turning over crucial evidence, and that the extra two months would give them “the necessary time to prepare his defense” for a new superseding indictment filed April 3.
The request — far longer than the two-week delay Diddy’s lawyers had hinted they might seek — was opposed by prosecutors, who said the new charges were not sufficiently different to require any delay at all, and that Combs was not entitled to the evidence he claimed he was owed.
In addition to denying the delay, Subramanian made another important ruling Friday. According to Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press, the judge granted a request from prosecutors to allow three alleged victims to testify under Jane Doe pseudonyms. Diddy’s lawyers had called the move “a blatant violation of Mr. Combs’s Sixth Amendment rights to confront witnesses,” but prosecutors said it was necessary to protect them from harassment and embarrassment.
The judge seemingly left at least one big pretrial issue unresolved: a motion filed by Combs on Thursday seeking to ban prosecutors from showing jurors the infamous 2016 surveillance video of him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura. Combs says the clips has been edited and will “confuse and mislead the jury”; prosecutors says it’s a “damning piece of evidence” that must be admitted.
A TikTok user who says she created the viral “Apple dance” to a Charli XCX song is suing Roblox over allegations that the company violated copyright law by selling her dance moves as an “emote.”
In a lawsuit filed last week in Los Angeles federal court, Kelley Heyer says the online game platform used the dance – a viral sensation set to Charli’s “Apple” that was emulated by scores of celebrities and influencers – in a version of its “Dress To Impress” game that featured the singer Brat singer.
Though Roblox allegedly reached out to negotiate a license, Heyer says the talks never led to a deal – and that the company simply used her dance moves without permission.
Trending on Billboard
“Roblox proudly advertises that its platform allows creators to ‘create, scale and monetize,’” her lawyers write. “Yet, it has prevented Ms. Heyer from the crucial monetization of her work on the Roblox platform.”
Charli XCX is not named in the lawsuit nor accused of any wrongdoing.
Numerous copyright lawsuits have been filed in recent years over viral dance moves featured in online video games. Alfonso Ribeiro, who played Carlton on The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, sued Fortnite owner Epic Games over the use of his heavily-memed “Carlton dance” as an emote, as did the mother of Russell Horning, the so-called Backpack Kid who helped popularize the viral “Floss” dance.
For years, those cases faced skeptical judges who questioned whether simple dance moves were covered by copyright law. In 2020, a federal judge sided with Epic and tossed out a case filed by two former college basketball players over their “running man” dance. But in 2023 a federal appeals court issued a first-of-its-kind ruling reviving such a lawsuit against Epic Games, in which a panel of judges said they “see no reason to treat choreography differently” from longer dance routines.
In her lawsuit, Heyer says her dance was clearly protected by copyright law – and that Epic and Netflix have both struck licensing deals with her to use it. She says Roblox earned $123,000 in sales from selling the dance to users, but has refused to pay her any of it.
“Roblox has substantially benefitted and profited from its unlawful infringement of Ms. Heyer’s copyright and other uninvited misappropriations of Ms. Heyer’s intellectual property and proprietary rights in the Apple Dance,” her lawyers write.
In a statement responding to the lawsuit, Roblox denied any wrongdoing: “Roblox takes the protection of intellectual property very seriously and is committed to protecting intellectual property rights of independent developers and creators to brands and artists both on and off the platform,” the company said. “Roblox is confident in its position and the propriety of its dealings in this matter and looks forward to responding in court.”
Attorneys for Sean “Diddy” Combs asked a federal judge Thursday (April 17) to exclude the infamous 2016 surveillance video of him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura from his upcoming sex trafficking trial, arguing it would “unfairly confuse and mislead the jury.”
The headline-grabbing clip, showing Combs striking his then-girlfriend in the hallway of a Los Angeles hotel in 2016, has been “altered, manipulated, sped-up, and edited to be out of sequence,” making it unusable as evidence at his trial next month, his lawyers told the judge.
“The admission of any of these inaccurate, unreliable video files would unfairly confuse and mislead the jury at Mr. Combs’s expense,” the star’s lawyers wrote in the filing. “Their admission would be infinitely more prejudicial than probative.”
In the lead up to the trial, Combs’ lawyers have repeatedly targeted the Cassie tape — likely a core piece of evidence that the government will present to jurors. In one motion, they argued that federal authorities had improperly leaked it to the press to “taint the jury pool.” Last month, they accused CNN of significantly altering the clip and then destroying the original before the network aired it last May.
With Thursday’s filing, Combs’ lawyers finally did what court-watchers were expecting: formally asking the judge to ban the clip from the trial. They cited a report from a forensic video expert that said the clip had been distorted beyond repair, including edits by CNN that Combs’ team says were intentionally made to make the video look worse.
“The manipulation of the videos was specifically designed to inflame the passions of CNN’s viewing audience, and that is what the government is hoping to leverage in this case,” Combs’ attorneys write. “The videos are sped up to make the violence look more violent. The sequence is reordered to leave the viewer with the impression that the woman has been dragged back to a hotel room. And the clips delete footage that provides important context making clear that the events were not as horrific as the government will suggest.”
Combs was indicted in September, charged with running a sprawling criminal operation that aimed to “fulfill his sexual desires.” The case centers on elaborate “freak off” parties in which Combs and others would allegedly ply victims with drugs and then coerce them into having sex, as well as on alleged acts of violence to keep victims silent.
A trial is currently set for May 5, though Combs’ lawyers are currently seeking to push the trial back by two months. If convicted on all of the charges, which include sex trafficking and racketeering, Combs faces a potential life prison sentence.
The Cassie video, which aired on CNN in May, showed him attacking her at the Intercontinental Hotel in March 2016. The clip drew far more public attention to the accusations against the star — who was then only facing a civil lawsuit — and prompted an apology from Combs shortly after it aired.
“My behavior on that video is inexcusable,” Combs said at the time. “I take full responsibility for my actions in that video. I was disgusted then when I did it. I’m disgusted now. I went and I sought out professional help. I got into going to therapy, going to rehab. I had to ask God for his mercy and grace. I’m so sorry.”
Prosecutors and plaintiffs’ attorneys have criticized Combs and his lawyers over their efforts to bar the video from his trial. In one filing, the government said Combs was attacking the clip in an effort to “suppress a damning piece of evidence.” And Douglas Wigdor, Cassie’s attorney, called the star’s arguments “disingenuous” last month: “I am confident that the video fairly and accurately represents what happened, will be admitted into evidence, and that Combs will be held accountable for his depravity.”
Attorneys for Megan Thee Stallion say Tory Lanez must be held in contempt of court over “disruptive” and “inflammatory” behavior during a recent deposition in a civil lawsuit that they say “made a mockery of the proceedings.”
In a motion filed Wednesday, lawyers for the rapper (Megan Pete) say Lanez (Daystar Peterson) – currently serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting Megan in 2020 – behaved so poorly during the jail-house deposition that it had to be cancelled shortly after it started.
They claim he “feigned ignorance regarding the definition of basic words” and repeatedly harassed Megan’s lawyer about her appearance. They also say he “pretended that the video equipment was not working despite prison staff confirming it was functioning properly.”
Trending on Billboard
“Mr. Peterson made a mockery of the proceedings,” Megan’s attorneys write. “Nothing short of a contempt finding and meaningful sanctions will deter Mr. Peterson from continuing to abuse the process.”
On Thursday, Judge Cecilia Altonaga gave Lanez until April 30 to explain why he shouldn’t face such punishment: “Daystar Peterson is ordered to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for violating the court’s order authorizing his deposition.”
Lanez was convicted in December 2022 on three felony counts for shooting Megan in July 2020 during an argument following a pool party at Kylie Jenner’s house in the Hollywood Hills. In August 2023, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He has filed an appeal, which remains pending.
This week’s dispute comes in a civil lawsuit Megan filed last year against social media personality Milagro Gramz (Milagro Cooper), who the star claims waged a “coordinated campaign” with Lanez to “defame and delegitimize” her in the wake of the shooting and trial. A judge ruled in February that the case could move ahead, saying Megan’s allegations, if later proven, “paint a picture of an intentional campaign to destroy her reputation.”
As part of that lawsuit, Megan’s lawyers asked to depose Lanez from prison, saying it was necessary to investigate the extent of Gramz’ alleged coordination with him. But in Wednesday’s filing, Megan’s attorneys say the sit-down “proved to be a waste of time” due to Lanez’s “egregious” conduct.
Among other alleged disruptions, they say Lanez repeatedly demanded dictionary definitions of basic terms before he would answer simple questions, such as the word “meet” when they asked him if he had met with his attorneys ahead of the deposition.
“It could mean a lot of things. I mean meat could be a hot dog; meat could be a steak; meat could be red meat. It could be a lot of things,” Lanez allegedly said, according to a transcript cited by Megan’s lawyers. “You know what I’m saying? You could watch porno. Meat – meat is a whole different thing over there. Meet can be anything. I’m asking you what is your definition of ‘meet.’”
Megan’s lawyers say that Lanez behavior was so bad that even his own lawyers have “disavowed it.” In emails quoted in the filing, Gramz’ attorney Michael Pancier allegedly said the incident had “wasted our time as well” and that he would not oppose “any action you wish to take” against Lanez. Pancier’s co-counsel Michael Hayden, who also represents Lanez in his California criminal appeal, was allegedly copied on the email and did not object.
Reached for comment on the filing via email on Thursday, Pancier told Billboard: “Nothing much to say as Mr. Peterson is not my client and he is not a party to this litigation, and we have nothing to do with him.” Hayden did not immediately return a request for comment.