State Champ Radio Legal News
Page: 85
A bipartisan group of U.S. House lawmakers announced a new bill on Wednesday (Jan. 10) that regulates the use of AI for cloning voices and likenesses. Called the No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act of 2023 (“No AI FRAUD” Act), the bill aims to establish a federal framework for protecting one’s voice and likeness and lays out First Amendment protections.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
More federal and state legislation regulating artificial intelligence is expected to be announced later today, including a bill from Gov. Bill Lee of Tennessee also regarding AI voice and likeness cloning. On Jan. 5, Gov. Lee hinted at the subject of his forthcoming legislation: “As the technology landscape evolves with artificial intelligence, we’re proud to lead the nation in proposing legal protection for our best-in-class artists and songwriters.”
The No AI FRAUD Act was introduced by Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-FL), the lead Republican sponsor of the bill, alongside Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-PA), Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), Joe Morelle (D-NY) and Rob Wittman (R-VA). It is said to be based on the Senate discussion draft Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act (“NO FAKES” Act), which was announced last October.
“It’s time for bad actors using AI to face the music,” said Rep. Salazar. “This bill plugs a hole in the law and gives artists and U.S. citizens the power to protect their rights, their creative work, and their fundamental individuality online.”
AI voice synthesis technology poses a new problem and opportunity for recording artists. While some laud it as a novel marketing, creative or fan engagement tool, it also leaves artists vulnerable to uncanny impersonations that could confuse, scam or mislead the public.
An artists’ voice, image or likeness may be covered by “right of publicity” laws which protect them from commercial exploitation without authorization, but this is a right that varies state by state. The No AI FRAUD Act aims to establish a harmonized baseline of protection. Still, if one lives in a state with an even stronger right of publicity law than the No AI FRAUD Act, that state protection is still viable, and may be easier to address in court.
This bill is keeping with regulations that a number of music business executives, including those at Sony, ASCAP, UMG, have called for in recent months — following incidents like the viral fake-Drake song “Heart On My Sleeve.”
Mitch Glazier, chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), released a statement, showing support for the No AI FRAUD Act. “The No AI FRAUD Act is a meaningful step towards building a safe, responsible and ethical AI ecosystem, and the RIAA applauds Representatives Salazar, Dean, Moran, Morelle, and Wittman for leading in this important area. To be clear, we embrace the use of AI to offer artists and fans new creative tools that support human creativity. But putting in place guardrails like the No AI FRAUD Act is a necessary step to protect individual rights, preserve and promote the creative arts, and ensure the integrity and trustworthiness of generative AI. As decades of innovation have shown, when Congress establishes strong IP rights that foster market-led solutions, it results in both driving innovation and supporting human expression and partnerships that create American culture.”
Lucian Grainge, chairman and CEO of Universal Music Group, also shared his praise for the new bill in a statement: “Universal Music Group strongly supports the ‘No AI FRAUD Act’ because no one should be permitted to steal someone else’s image, likeness or voice. While we have an industry-leading track record of enabling AI in the service of artists and creativity, AI that uses their voice or identity without authorization is unacceptable and immoral. We call upon Congress to help put an end to nefarious deepfakes by enacting this federal right of publicity and ensuring that all Americans are protected from such harm.”
A judge set bail Tuesday at $750,000 for a former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop legend Tupac Shakur in 1996 and said he can serve house arrest with electronic monitoring ahead of his trial in June.
Court-appointed attorneys for Duane “Keffe D” Davis told The Associated Press after the hearing in Las Vegas that they believe he can post bail. They had asked for bail of not more than $100,000.
The lawyers argued in a court filing a day before that their client — not witnesses, as prosecutors had said — faced danger. And they say that their 60-year-old client is in poor health after battling cancer, which is in remission, and that he won’t flee to avoid trial.
“We believe he can” post bail, public defender Robert Arroyo said after Tuesday’s hearing.
The lawyers accused prosecutors of misinterpreting a jail telephone recording and a list of names provided to Davis’ family members, and of misreporting to the judge that Davis poses a threat to the public if he were released.
Davis “never threatened anyone during the phone calls,” said Arroyo and Charles Cano, deputy special public defenders, in their seven-page filing Monday. “Furthermore, (prosecutors’) interpretation of the use of ‘green light’ is flat-out wrong.”
The “green light” reference is from a recording of an October jail call that prosecutors Marc DiGiacomo and Binu Palal provided last month to Clark County District Judge Carli Kierny, who presided over the bail hearing.
The prosecution’s filing made no reference to Davis instructing anyone to harm someone, or to anyone associated with the case being physically harmed. But the prosecutors added that “In (Davis’) world, a ‘green light’ is an authorization to kill.”
“Duane’s son was saying he heard there was a greenlight on Duane’s family,” Davis’ attorneys wrote, using his first name. “Duane obviously did not know what his son was talking about.”
Davis’ lawyers also used his first name Monday, asking Kierny to consider what they called “the obvious question.”
“If Duane is so dangerous, and the evidence so overwhelming,” they wrote, “why did (police and prosecutors) wait 15 years to arrest Duane for the murder of Tupac Shakur?”
Prosecutors point to Davis’ own words since 2008 — in police interviews, in a 2019 tell-all memoir and in the media — that they say provides strong evidence that he orchestrated the September 1996 shooting.
Davis’ attorneys argue that his descriptions of Shakur’s killing were “done for entertainment purposes and to make money.”
Davis, originally from Compton, California, is the only person still alive who was in the car from which shots were fired in the drive-by shooting that also wounded rap music mogul Marion “Suge” Knight. Knight is now serving 28 years in a California prison for an unrelated fatal shooting in the Los Angeles area in 2015.
Davis’ attorneys noted Monday that Knight is an eyewitness to the Shakur shooting but did not testify before the grand jury that indicted Davis ahead of his arrest arrest Sept. 29 outside his Henderson home. Las Vegas police had served a search warrant at the house in mid-July.
Davis has pleaded not guilty to murder and has been jailed without bail at the Clark County Detention Center in Las Vegas, where detainees’ phone calls are routinely recorded. If convicted at trial, he could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Davis maintains he was given immunity from prosecution in 2008 by an FBI and Los Angeles police task force investigating the killings of Shakur in Las Vegas and rival rapper Christopher Wallace, known as The Notorious B.I.G. or Biggie Smalls, six months later in Los Angeles.
DiGiacomo and Palal say any immunity agreement was limited. Last week, they submitted to the court an audio recording of a Dec. 18, 2008, task force interview during which they said Davis “was specifically told that what he said in the room would not be used against him, but (that) if he were talk to other people, that could put him in jeopardy.”
Davis’ attorneys responded Monday with a reference to the publication 12 years ago of a book written by former Los Angeles police Detective Greg Kading, who attended those interviews.
“Duane is not worried,” the attorneys said, “because his alleged involvement in the death of Shakur has been out in the public since … 2011.”
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: A judge clears French Montana of copyright infringement but sympathizes with his accuser; T.I. and his wife face the latest sexual assault accusations to rock the music industry; Cher battles with her son over a potential conservatorship; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: French Montana’s “Technical” Copyright Victory
Imitation might be the “sincerest form of flattery,” but it isn’t always copyright infringement. That was the key takeaway from an unusual federal court ruling last week, in which a judge dismissed a copyright lawsuit against French Montana – but almost seemed to regret that she had to do so?
The case against French (Karim Kharbouch) was filed by a little-known Chicago artist named Hotwire The Producer (Eddie Lee Richardson), who claimed the star rapper’s 2013 hit “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’” featured an unlicensed sample of his earlier song “Hood Pushin’ Weight.”
In a decision Thursday, Judge Nancy L. Maldonado ruled that French’s song did not technically infringe the rights that Richardson had secured – he registered only the copyright to a sound recording, not the underlying musical composition. But she also expressed “great sympathy” for Richardson, lamenting that he had failed to fully register his copyrights and saying that the outcome of the case “might have been very different” if he had.
“If it is any consolation, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the Court hopes that Richardson will not be deterred in his musical endeavors, now armed with a better understanding of copyright law,” Judge Maldonado wrote. “As it is, though, Richardson’s evidence in this particular case is insufficient to establish copyright infringement.”
For more on what the judge had to say in her opinion — including advising French not to celebrate too much over a “technical win” – go read our full story.
Other top stories this week…
T.I. SEX ASSAULT CASE – The rapper and his wife Tiny were hit with a civil lawsuit claiming they drugged and sexually assaulted a woman they met in a Los Angeles nightclub in 2005. In the complaint, lawyers for the unnamed Jane Doe accuser said that T.I. (Clifford Harris) and Tiny (Tameka Harris) gave her a spiked drink after she was introduced to them in the VIP section of a club, then brought her back to their hotel room where they “forced her to get naked” and assaulted her. In a statement to Billboard, the couple “emphatically and categorically” denied the allegations and vowed to fight back against a lawsuit that they said the plaintiff had been threatening to file for years.
JIMMIE ALLEN ATTORNEY SHAKEUP – More than six months after Jimmie Allen was hit with a pair of sexual assaults, news broke that the country star was parting ways with the legal team that’s been representing him (from the Tennessee law firm Baker Donelson) in the cases. The move to swap lawyers quickly prompted objections from his accusers, who say he’s obstructing the progress of the litigation by “moving through attorneys.”
CHER FIGHTS SON OVER CONSERVATORSHIP – A Los Angeles judge declined to immediately put Cher’s son (Elijah Blue Allman) into a legal conservatorship – an arrangement she is seeking over his opposition — but said he would take up the issue again later this month. Cher petitioned for the conservatorship late last year, arguing that Elijah’s struggles with addiction and mental health have left him unable to manage his money and potentially put his life in danger by making him able to buy drugs.
TUPAC MURDER BAIL BATTLE – A hearing is set for Tuesday over whether Duane “Keffe D” Davis, the former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop music legend Tupac Shakur, should be released on bail. The proceedings had initially been scheduled for last week, but were delayed after prosecutors raised new arguments for why Davis poses a threat to the public if he is released.
MAREN MORRIS DIVORCE SETTLED – Maren Morris reached a settlement to resolve her divorce proceedings against singer/songwriter Ryan Hurd, her husband of five years. Under the terms of the deal, Morris, 33, will pay Hurd, 37, $2,100 per month in child support as the two evenly split time with their three-and-a-half-year-old son, Hayes Andrew. Most of the rest of the settlement was stipulated in a prenuptial agreement, which the couple signed in 2018 and updated in 2022.
A judge on Friday declined to immediately put Cher’s son into the legal conservatorship that she is seeking and he is opposing, but the court will take up the issue again within weeks. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jessica A. Uzcategui ruled that Cher’s attorneys had not given Elijah Blue Allman and his lawyers the necessary documents […]
Imitation might be the “sincerest form of flattery,” but it isn’t always copyright infringement.
That was the unusual message from an Illinois federal judge Thursday, as she dismissed a lawsuit accusing French Montana (Karim Kharbouch) of illegally sampling from a little-known Chicago hip hop producer on his song “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’.”
Eddie Lee Richardson – aka Hotwire The Producer – had claimed that French’s 2013 hit ripped off his instrumental song “Hood Pushin’ Weight.” But Judge Nancy L. Maldonado ruled that the superstar’s song did not technically infringe the rights owned by Richardson.
“The mere fact that the songs may share certain musical elements is simply not enough for a jury to conclude that such sampling actually occurred,” the judge wrote, ending the lawsuit.
Though she sided with French, Judge Maldonado was highly sympathetic to Richardson. She included an unusual note at the end of the ruling, stressing that it was merely a “technical win” for French — and one that he “should not claim as a substantive victory.” And she repeatedly suggested that, had Richardson secured a more complete set of intellectual property rights, the outcome might have been different.
“If it is any consolation, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the Court hopes that Richardson will not be deterred in his musical endeavors, now armed with a better understanding of copyright law,” Judge Maldonado wrote. “As it is, though, Richardson’s evidence in this particular case is insufficient to establish copyright infringement.”
Richardson sued French in 2019, claiming the star and others stole core elements from “Hood Pushin’ Weight” – an instrumental track Richardson published in 2012 on the platform SoundClick – when they wrote “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’,” which reached No. 14 on Billboard’s Hot Rap Songs chart in August 2013.
But the fatal flaw in the lawsuit, as explained by Judge Maldonado on Thursday, was that Richardson only secured a copyright registration to the song’s sound recording, and did not lock up such protection for the underlying musical composition. That means that French would only have infringed “Hood Pushin’ Weight” if he directly sampled from it, the judge said, and not if he merely made a song that included similar music elements.
“Unfortunately for Richardson, his express admission in this case that he has only a sound recording copyright, and not one for a musical composition, means that he does not have exclusive rights in the generic sounds or melodies of HPW,” the judge wrote.
If he had gone the extra step and registered for a copyright on the musical composition, Judge Maldonado said the outcome of the case “might have been very different” than Thursday’s dismissal.
“In that case, Richardson’s expert evidence as to the similarity of the ‘sounds’ or melodies of the songs likely would have been enough to send this case to trial,” the judge wrote. “But with a sound recording registration only, Richardson’s means for establishing infringement are much more limited.”
With his more restricted rights, Richardson needed to provide evidence that French or someone else involved in “Ain’t Worried About Nothin’” directly copied his actual recording into the new song. But Judge Maldonado said the producer had “failed to do so.”
It likely won’t mean much in the wake of a failed lawsuit, but the judge said she had “great sympathy for Richardson’s situation.”
“He created HPW as a teenager, registered a copyright on his own, and brought this action seeking to protect his rights in his original work of music, as provided under the Copyright Act,” the judge wrote. “Unfortunately for Richardson, in the Copyright Act, Congress established a very firm distinction.”
“Put plainly,” the judge wrote, “Richardson cannot bring a claim for copyright infringement of his sound recording based solely on the contention that the songs sound alike.”
Attorneys for both sides did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision.
More than six months after Jimmie Allen was first sued for sexual assault, the country star is splitting with his lawyers — and one of his accusers claims he’s delaying the case by doing so.
In a court filing last month obtained by Billboard, Allen’s lawyers, Jonathan Cole and Katelyn R. Dwyer from the prominent Tennessee law firm Baker Donelson, asked to withdraw from the case, saying the singer had been “unable to comply” with the terms of his representation agreement.
The filings (first reported by The Tennessean) contained no other details about the reason for Allen’s split with his lawyers. But they quickly prompted a response from his accuser’s attorney, who argued last week in her own filing that Allen had already cycled through three different law firms over the past year — and that he was stalling the case in the process.
“Allen has a track record of moving through attorneys,” wrote Elizabeth A. Fegan, counsel for Allen’s Jane Doe accusers. “These tactics are part of Allen’s continuing pattern of conduct to forestall plaintiff’s right to gather discovery to pursue her claims.”
After nearly eight months of litigation, Fegan argued that Allen had thus far “failed to produce the most basic information” during “discovery” — referring to the legal process in which key evidence is exchanged during a lawsuit. She claimed that Allen’s current attorneys at Baker Donelson are in possession of some materials, but that they “do not intend to produce it” before they withdraw from the case.
A rep for Allen did not immediately return a request for comment on the new dispute.
Allen, a once-rising country music star, was sued twice last year for sexual assault — first by a member of his management team who claims he harassed and assaulted her, then again by a woman who says he assaulted her in a Las Vegas hotel room and secretly recorded it. Both women sued as anonymous Jane Does.
The current filings only apply to the first case filed by the Jane Doe who served on Allen’s management team. Fegan did not oppose Cole and Dwyer’s similar motion to withdraw from the second case over the alleged Las Vegas incident, and that request was granted last week.
Allen has strongly denied all the accusations, saying he would “mount a vigorous defense.” He later counter-sued both women, accusing the management employee of defaming him and claiming that the other woman had stolen the phone he allegedly used to record her.
According to the new filings by Fegan (who represents both Doe accusers), when she first contacted Allen regarding her clients’ accusations, he was represented by Frost Brown Todd LLP, another well-known regional law firm. She said she later corresponded with another lawyer (Andrew Brettler of the firm Berk Brettler LLP) before Cole and Dwyer, the attorneys from Baker Donelson, appeared as Allen’s formal counsel when the lawsuit was filed in court.
Since then, she claimed Allen has “not responded to or provided any information pursuant to any of plaintiff’s discovery requests.” Given that there are “impending deadlines” — including a February cut-off for discovery — Fegan argued that allowing Cole and Dwyer to withdraw from the case would result in “severe prejudice.” Instead, she asked for a court order forcing them to turn over key information about the current status of the discovery process before they leave the case.
“Without this information, Plaintiff is unable to diligently prosecute her claims, meet the Court’s current deadlines, or adequately prepare for depositions,” Fegan wrote.
T.I. and his wife Tiny Harris are facing a new civil lawsuit that claims they drugged and sexually assaulted a woman they met in a Los Angeles nightclub in 2005.
In a complaint filed Tuesday in Los Angeles court, lawyers for a Jane Doe accuser say T.I. (Clifford Harris) and Tiny (Tameka Harris) gave her a spiked drink after she was introduced to them in the VIP section of a club, then brought her back to their hotel room where they “forced her to get naked” and assaulted her.
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
“Plaintiff did not consent to any of the sexual assault or misconduct and did not have the capacity to consent after being drugged by defendants,” lawyers for the alleged victim write in the lawsuit, which was obtained by Billboard.
Attorneys for accuser, who they say was in her early twenties and serving in the U.S. Air Force at the time, claim she was introduced to the couple by an associate named “Caviar,” who she says she met the previous night at the house of the rapper Coolio. Midway through the alleged incident, after she allegedly drank a beverage offered her by Tiny, she began to feel “extremely dizzy and lightheaded” and later passed out.
The allegations share similarities to previously-reported accusations. In 2021, the New York Times reported a police investigation over an alleged 2005 incident in which “a military veteran” claimed the famous couple had “raped her in a hotel room” after she had become “incapacitated” while drinking with them in the “VIP section” at a Los Angeles club.
At the time, the couple strongly denied any wrongdoing, saying the accusations were part of “a sordid shakedown campaign.” Prosecutors later declined to bring charges over the allegations, citing the expiration of a 10-year statute of limitations.
The new case is filed under California’s Sexual Abuse and Cover Up Accountability Act, which created a four-year window through 2026 for alleged victims to bring cases that would otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations. The law is similar to New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which recently led to a wave of sexual abuse cases in that state before the statute expired in November.
Representatives for the Harrises and their label, Grand Hustle Records, did not immediately return requests for comment on the lawsuit’s allegations. The attorney who represented the couple during the earlier police investigation also did return a request for comment.
The new lawsuit against the Harrises contains explicit details of the alleged sexual assault.
After meeting T.I. and Tiny at the nightclub, the accuser’s lawyers claim Tiny “handed plaintiff a drink” and “watched her take a drink.” A short time later, the trio allegedly returned to a nearby hotel, where Tiny “took off all of plaintiff’s clothing,” got undressed herself, and they were joined by a nude T.I.
“Plaintiff was then directed to get in the shower and T.I. and Tiny entered the shower with her,” her lawyers write. “Plaintiff was extremely shocked and uncomfortable.” After the shower, the accuser claims she began to feel “extremely dizzy and lightheaded” and was “visibly drugged” as T.I. told her to get into bed.
“Plaintiff could tell she was experiencing something serious and debilitating that was not a symptom of a typical drink or a few drinks,” her lawyers say.
After T.I. allegedly forced her to watch pornographic movies, he then “demanded she begin rubbing oil on his back and naked body, while Tiny “proceeded to get on plaintiff’s back, while she was still naked, and grind back and forth” on top of her. Then, “while Tiny was straddled on plaintiff’s back and pinning her down,” the accuser claims that T.I. “proceeded to slide his toes into plaintiff’s vagina.”
“Plaintiff grew increasingly sicker and felt extremely ill by the assault and battery she was experiencing,” the Doe’s attorneys write. Eventually, she “forced herself up and went into the bathroom where she proceeded to vomit.” She later emerged from the bathroom “naked, dazed, sickened, and weak” and passed out on a couch.
When she was awoken by a security guard the next morning, the accuser claims she “immediately noticed her vagina was in serious pain.” As she was crying, she says the security guard then escorted her out of the room.
The lawsuit is the latest in a recent flood of lawsuits alleging sexual assault and sexual harassment by men in the music industry. Over the past year, such cases have been filed against hip hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs, Aerosmith star Steven Tyler, Interscope Records co-founder Jimmy Iovine and former Recording Academy president Neil Portnow, among many others.
If you or someone you know has experienced sexual violence and need support and/or resources, reach out to RAINN and the National Sexual Assault Hotline (800-656-HOPE) for free, confidential help 24/7.
A bail hearing was postponed Tuesday in Las Vegas for a former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop music legend Tupac Shakur in 1996, giving defense attorneys time to respond to prosecutors’ allegations that witnesses in the case may be at risk.
Duane “Keffe D” Davis’ court-appointed attorneys sought the delay to respond to prosecutors’ allegations, filed last week, that jail telephone recordings and a list of names provided to Davis’ family members show that Davis poses a threat to the public if he is released.
No court hearing was held Tuesday. One of Davis’ attorneys, Robert Arroyo, told The Associated Press later that the defense wanted to respond in court in writing. He declined to provide details. Arroyo said last week he did not see evidence that any witness had been named or threatened.
Davis is the only person ever charged with a crime in the drive-by shooting that also wounded rap music mogul Marion “Suge” Knight, who is now serving 28 years in a California prison for an unrelated fatal shooting in the Los Angeles area in 2015.
Davis has pleaded not guilty and is due for trial in June on a murder charge. He has remained jailed without bail since his arrest Sept. 29 outside his Henderson home. Las Vegas police had served a search warrant there in mid-July.
Davis, originally from Compton, California, is now housed at the Clark County Detention Center in Las Vegas, where detainees’ phone calls are routinely recorded. If convicted at trial, he could spend the rest of his life in prison.
In a recording of an October jail call, prosecutors say Davis’ son told the defendant about a “green light” authorization. Their court filing made no reference to Davis instructing anyone to harm someone, or to anyone associated with the case being physically harmed.
“In (Davis’) world, a ‘green light’ is an authorization to kill,” prosecutors Marc DiGiacomo and Binu Palal told Clark County District Court Judge Carli Kierny in the court document, adding that at least one witness was provided assistance from federal authorities “so he could change his residence.”
Prosecutors also point to Davis’ own words since 2008 — in police interviews, in his 2019 tell-all memoir and in the media — that they say provides strong evidence that he orchestrated the September 1996 shooting.
Davis’ attorneys argue that his descriptions of Shakur’s killing were “done for entertainment purposes and to make money.”
Arroyo and co-counsel Charles Cano have argued their 60-year-old client is in poor health after a battle with cancer that is in remission, poses no danger to the community, and won’t flee to avoid trial. They want Kierny to set bail at not more than $100,000.
Davis maintains that he was given immunity from prosecution in 2008 by FBI agents and Los Angeles police who were investigating the killings of Shakur in Las Vegas and rival rapper Christopher Wallace, known as The Notorious B.I.G. or Biggie Smalls, six months later in Los Angeles.
Davis’ bail hearing is now scheduled for Jan. 9.
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 full recap of the music law stories that dominated 2023, from #MeToo to artificial intelligence to Ed Sheeran to Young Thug; an appellate setback for Nirvana in the lawsuit over a naked baby on a famous album cover; a lawsuit filed by New York’s attorney general accusing SiriusXM of “trapping” consumers; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
Year In Review: 2023’s Top Legal Stories
Before we start bringing you all the upcoming music law stories of 2024 — A verdict in the Atlanta RICO trial? More AI lawsuits? A peace treaty between Hall & Oates?!? — let’s take a quick look back at everything that happened in 2023.
Ed Sheeran went to trial over “Let’s Get It On” — and won big. Young Thug went to trial over accusations of gang violence — and there’s no end in sight. A number of men in the music industry were hit with sexual abuse lawsuits, from label executives to star artists to hip hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs. Lizzo got sued, too, by backup dancers who say she was a toxic boss. And the sudden rise of generative artificial intelligence technology like ChatGPT posed thorny legal questions that could take years to sort out.
To get the full story, go read our entire year-end recap — including the 10 biggest music law stories of 2023 and a slew of honorable mentions.
Other top stories this week…
NIRVANA NAKED BABY CASE – A federal appeals court ruled against Nirvana and revived a child pornography lawsuit filed by Spencer Elden, the man (now in his 30s) who appeared as a nude baby on the cover of the band’s 1991 album Nevermind. The ruling, which said child porn “haunts victims” for years, paves the way for litigation over whether the image actually meets the definition of child pornography — something Nirvana vigorously disputes and some legal experts doubt.
NO-CANCEL CULTURE? – SiriusXM was sued by New York’s attorney general over allegations that the satellite radio and streaming service has made it “extremely difficult” for listeners to cancel their subscriptions, including by subjecting them to “a lengthy and burdensome endurance contest” on the phone. “Sirius deliberately wastes its subscribers’ time even though it has the ability to process cancellations with the click of a button.”
GLORIA TREVI ABUSE CASE – The Mexican pop star sued her former manager and music producer Sergio Andrade, claiming he was a “true predator” who subjected her and other women to “sadistic abuse” in the late 1980s and 1990s. The allegations came as a counter-claim to an earlier lawsuit filed in 2022 by two alleged victims who accused both Andrade and Trevi of “grooming” and “exploiting” them as children.
AMERICAN IDOL ASSAULT CLAIMS – Paula Abdul sued former American Idol producer Nigel Lythgoe over allegations that he sexually assaulted her, including once during the early seasons of Idol and again in 2014 during the production of So You Think You Can Dance.
Paula Abdul is suing Nigel Lythgoe over claims that the former American Idol and So You Think You Can Dance producer sexually assaulted her while she was filming the competition television shows.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The singer-dancer claims in the lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Friday (Dec. 29) and obtained by Billboard, that Lythgoe sexually assaulted her on two occasions. The first instance allegedly occurred during one of the early seasons of American Idol and the second took place in 2014 when she was in talks to judge So You Think You Can Dance.
Abdul, 61, alleges in the suit that Lythgoe, 74, first sexually assaulted her in an elevator of a hotel where they were both staying while traveling for one of Idol’s “initial seasons.” It does not state a specific year the alleged incident occurred.
“Lythgoe shoved Abdul against the wall, then grabbed her genitals and breasts, and began shoving his tongue down her throat,” according to court documents. “Abdul attempted to push Lythgoe away from her and let him know his behavior was not acceptable. When the doors to the elevator for her door opened, Abdul ran out of the elevator and to her hotel room. In tears, Abdul quickly called one of her representatives to inform them of the assault, but ultimately decided not to take action for fear that Lythgoe would have her fired from American Idol.”
Abdul’s complaint claims that Lythgoe sexually assaulted Abdul again in 2014 when she was approached for a judging position on So You Think You Can Dance. The alleged incident took place during a dinner at his home where the two were supposed to discuss her professional opportunities, according to the lawsuit.
“Toward the end of the evening, however, Lythgoe forced himself on top of Abdul while she was seated on his couch and attempted to kiss her while proclaiming that the two would make an excellent ‘power couple,’” the complaint states. “Abdul pushed Lythgoe off of her, explaining that she was not interested in his advances, and immediately left Lythgoe’s home.”
The suit also alleges that Abdul witnessed Lythgoe sexually assault one of her assistants while filming So You Think You Can Dance in 2015. Lythgoe allegedly “pressed himself” against the woman and “began to grope her” without consent, court document states.
The “Strait Up” hitmaker’s suit further claims that Lythgoe taunted her on the phone about his alleged assaults and states that he “clearly knew that his assaults of Abdul were not just wrong but that he held the power to keep her silent.”
In addition to Lythgoe, the lawsuit names the shows’ production companies American Idol Productions, Dance Nation Productions, 19 Entertainment and Fremantlemedia North America are also listed as defendants. Abdul is suing the defendants for sexual assault/battery, sexual harassment, gender violence and negligence.
Representatives for Abdul and Lythgoe did not immediately reply to Billboard‘s request for comment at press time.
