Legal
Page: 2
Attorneys for Sean “Diddy” Combs are firing back at allegations that he’s obstructing his sex trafficking case from behind bars, claiming prosecutors improperly searched his cell and violated his right to attorney-client privilege.
Days after the government claimed Combs was seeking to “subvert the integrity” of the case by contacting witnesses, his lawyers said it was the prosecution that had made serious missteps – including by seizing “notes to his lawyers” about potential trial strategies.
“This search and seizure are in violation of Mr. Combs’ [constitutional] rights,” writes Diddy’s lead attorney Marc Agnifilo. “The targeted seizure of a pre-trial detainee’s work product and privileged materials – created in preparation for trial – is outrageous government conduct amounting to a substantive due process violation.”
In the filing, Diddy’s attorneys ask Judge Arun Subramanian to hold an immediate hearing to investigate the search and seizures, saying they want to ask key questions about how the process unfolded.
“Who authorized a search of Mr. Combs’ sleeping area, personal effects and paperwork?” Agnifilo writes. “Who made the decision to not tell Mr. Combs’ counsel that the U.S. Attorney was in possession of his notes, including ‘possibly privileged materials’ until after the government put them in a filing to keep him incarcerated?”
Combs, also known as Puff Daddy and P. Diddy, was once one of the most powerful men in the music industry. But in September, he was indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of racketeering and sex trafficking over what they say was a sprawling criminal operation aimed at satisfying his need for “sexual gratification.” If convicted on all the charges, he faces a potential sentence of life in prison.
On Friday, prosecutors leveled serious new allegations. Responding to Combs’ latest effort to be released on bail, they said such an action would still pose a grave risk of obstruction of justice; in the process, they accused Diddy of trying to reach out to witnesses, leak favorable materials, and orchestrate “social media campaigns” to influence public opinion and taint the jury pool.
“Defendant has continued to engage in a relentless course of obstructive conduct designed to subvert the integrity of these proceedings,” the prosecution wrote in the filing.
In the filing, prosecutors noted that some of their evidence came in the form of notes recovered from Diddy’s cell during what they called “a pre-planned nationwide sweep of BOP facilities.” The sweep turned up “possibly privileged materials,” but prosecutors said the evidence had been screened by a so-called filter team to avoid any improper material.
Attorney–client privilege exists to protect the right of an accused person to secure an effective defense from their lawyers. It’s designed to allow a defendant to be honest with their legal team, without needing to worry that such material might later be used against them.
In Monday’s response, Combs’ lawyers said some of the materials taken from his cell were “absolutely privileged” and should not have been handed over to the government lawyers who are barred from seeing them. They included “privileged notes to his lawyers concerning defense witnesses and defense strategies.”
“This is a matter of grave concern that, most respectfully, must be addressed immediately,” Agnifilo writes. “Because the U.S. Attorney, and it seems the trial prosecutors, are currently in possession of privileged materials we request a full evidentiary hearing as soon as the Court can accommodate us.”
Sean “Diddy” Combs has tried to reach out to prospective witnesses and influence public opinion from jail in a bid to affect potential jurors for his upcoming sex trafficking trial, prosecutors claimed in a court filing urging a judge to reject his latest bail request.
The government accusations were made in a Manhattan federal court filing late Friday (Nov. 15) that opposes the music mogul’s latest $50 million bail proposal. A bail hearing is scheduled for next week.
Prosecutors wrote that a review of recorded jail calls made by Combs shows he has asked family members to reach out to potential victims and witnesses and has urged them to create “narratives” to influence the jury pool. They say he also has encouraged marketing strategies to sway public opinion.
“The defendant has shown repeatedly — even while in custody — that he will flagrantly and repeatedly flout rules in order to improperly impact the outcome of his case. The defendant has shown, in other words, that he cannot be trusted to abide by rules or conditions,” prosecutors wrote in a submission that contained redactions.
Prosecutors wrote that it could be inferred from his behavior that Combs wants to blackmail victims and witnesses into silence or into providing testimony helpful to his defense.
Lawyers for Combs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Prosecutors said Combs, 55, began breaking rules almost as soon as he was detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn after his September arrest.
He has pleaded not guilty to charges that he coerced and abused women for years with the aid of a network of associates and employees, while silencing victims through blackmail and violence, including kidnapping, arson and physical beatings.
Two judges have concluded he is a danger to the community and a risk to flee.
His lawyers recently made a third request for bail after the rejection of two previous attempts, including a $50 million bail proposal.
In the request, they cited changed circumstances, including new evidence, which they said made it sensible to release Combs so he can better prepare for his May 5 trial.
But prosecutors said defense lawyers created their latest bail proposal using some evidence prosecutors turned over to them and the new material was already known to defense lawyers when they made previous bail applications.
In their submission to a judge, prosecutors said Combs’ behavior in jail shows he must remain locked up.
For instance, they said, Combs has enlisted family members to plan and carry out a social media campaign around his birthday “with the intention of influencing the potential jury in this criminal proceeding.”
He encouraged his children to post a video to their social media accounts showing them gathered to celebrate his birthday, they said.
Afterward, he monitored the analytics, including audience engagement, from the jail and “explicitly discussed with his family how to ensure that the video had his desired effect on potential jury members in this case,” they said.
The government also alleged Combs during other calls made clear his intention to anonymously publish information that he thought would help his defense against the charges.
“The defendant’s efforts to obstruct the integrity of this proceeding also includes relentless efforts to contact potential witnesses, including victims of his abuse who could provide powerful testimony against him,” prosecutors wrote.
Zach Bryan has completed his deferred prosecution agreement connected to his 2023 arrest in Oklahoma, People confirmed with the Craig County, Oklahoma District Attorney’s Office. Per the publication, since he completed the six-month agreement, the criminal case against him has been closed. “He admitted responsibility and followed all of the rules and conditions of probation,” […]
Lil Durk has pleaded not guilty to federal charges over an alleged plot to kill rival rapper Quando Rondo in a 2022 shooting.
At a hearing Thursday in Los Angeles federal court, the Chicago rapper (Durk Banks) was arraigned on conspiracy, murder-for-hire and firearms charges. He pleaded not guilty to all three, federal prosecutors confirmed to Billboard.
The court appearance came three weeks after the Chicago rapper (Durk Banks) was arrested and charged with orchestrating the 2022 attack at a Los Angeles gas station, which left Rondo (Tyquian Bowman) unscathed but saw his friend Lul Pab (Saviay’a Robinson) killed in the crossfire.
If convicted on all three charges, Durk faces a potential sentence of life in prison. A trial is tentatively set for January, though it could be pushed back for a variety of reasons.
Documents filed Thursday also reveal that Durk has hired Drew Findling, a prominent Atlanta criminal defense attorney with an extensive history representing rappers, including Gucci Mane, the members of Migos and Cardi B. Findling did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday.
Trending on Billboard
In their case against Durk, prosecutors claim that his “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. They say one of those acts was the 2022 attempted killing of Rondo, 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 charges last month, 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 those who they say actually carried out the attack, including alleged OTF members Kavon London Grant, Deandre Dontrell Wilson and Asa Houston, as well as Keith Jones and David Brian Lindsey, two other alleged Chicago gang members.
In charging documents, prosecutors allege that the assailants booked flights to Los Angeles using a credit card that was clearly connected to Durk. The government says the card was allegedly issued under a bank account that listed Durk’s one-time manager as an owner, and that another credit card was issued under the same account to Durk’s father.
Among other claims, the documents cite a text allegedly sent by Durk to another co-conspirator in the lead up to the shooting: “Don’t book no flights under no names involved wit me.”
In a superseding indictment unveiled last week, prosecutors also cited Durk’s lyrics – claiming he had directly referenced the Rondo shooting in a 2022 track called “Wonderful Wayne & Jackie Boy.” They claim the lyrics tie Durk to the killing, and that he was seeking to “commercialize” Lul Pab’s death by “rapping about his revenge.”
As he awaits trial, Durk is incarcerated at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles, a federal prison frequently used to house defendants before and during trial. He will appear again before the judge next month to decide whether he will be released on bail as he prepares for trial.
Ye (formerly Kanye West) is facing a new lawsuit over Vultures 1 from a group of Memphis rappers who claim the star and Ty Dolla $ign committed “brazen” copyright infringement by sampling a song after failing to secure a license.
The case – the latest in a long list of such lawsuits against Ye – claims the track “Fuk Sumn” is “riddled” with illegal samples from a 1994 song called “Drink a Yak (Part 2)” by the artists Criminal Manne (Vanda Watkins), DJ Squeeky (Hayward Ivy) and the late Kilo G (Robert L. Johnson Jr.)
Like several other previous cases against Ye, the lawsuit claims that the star’s reps reached out to clear the samples – but that he then just continued to use it without a license when talks broke down.
Trending on Billboard
“After numerous unsuccessful attempts at resolving this matter directly with the responsible parties, plaintiffs have been left with no other method of recourse than to bring this cause of action,” attorneys for the accusers write in a complaint filed Wednesday.
The use of the earlier song in “Fuk” is so “blatant” and “brazen” that the spots where samples were used in Ye’s track are “easily discernible,” the lawsuit claims. Near the start of Ye’s song, Criminal Manne can allegedly be heard rapping a lyric from “Yak” that stars with “smokin on a junt”; seconds later, Kilo G is allegedly heard rapping another line: “Stop off at the liquor store, get your yak, then we headed for the indo.”
The new lawsuit is one of more than a dozen such cases that have been filed against Ye over claims of unlicensed sampling or interpolating during his prolific career. The controversial rapper has faced nine such infringement cases since 2019 alone, including a high-profile battle with estate of Donna Summer that settled earlier this year.
Lawyers for the three accusers say that reps for Ye reached out to clear the sample in February, after “Fuk” had already been released. Those talks allegedly went on for months, but were terminated in June when the plaintiffs say they were were notified that “YE had fired his entire legal and business team leaving him without any legal representation.”
“Despite a much anticipated resolution resulting from several months of intense negotiations, Plaintiffs were informed they would need to wait to be contacted by Defendant YE’s new legal representation,” the lawsuit says.
Another Ye attorney then reached out to re-start the sample negotiations, the lawsuit says, but then were informed that he too was no longer working with Ye. The accusers say that no deal has been reached since.
“Plaintiffs have never given permission to Defendants for such use of their music,” attorneys for the three rappers write. “Meanwhile all Defendants have continued to profit from the illegal usage of the sampled [song] with over 150,000,000 Spotify streams to date.”
Reps for Ye and Ty Dolla did not immediately return a request for comment.
Megadeth and lead singer Dave Mustaine have agreed to pay $1.4 million to resolve allegations that they still owed commissions to a long-time manager after he was “unceremoniously” fired and replaced by Mustaine’s son.
The deal will resolve claims in a lawsuit filed last year by Cory Brennan and his Five B Artist Management, which alleged that Mustaine was refusing to hand over more than $1 million in unpaid commissions after abruptly terminating Brennan in early 2023.
In a filing made public on Wednesday (Nov. 13), attorneys for Brennan alerted a Los Angeles judge that Mustaine and Megadeth had agreed to pay the manager and Five B a total of $1,400,006 to end the litigation over those accusations.
Trending on Billboard
The settlement will not end the dispute entirely. Mustaine countersued Brennan last year, claiming his tenure as manager had been “plagued with missteps” that caused serious harm, including damaging Mustaine’s hearing. Those claims were not resolved by the settlement and will continue to be litigated.
In a statement to Billboard on Wednesday, Brennan’s attorney, Howard King, said that while his client was “displeased at having to sue an artist,” he was “gratified” by the settlement payment.
“Dave Mustaine, who has a known history of firing advisors, terminated Five B Artist Management after 9 years of their having resurrected his failing career,” King said. “Ignoring the success Five B had helped Dave achieve, including a campaign to help him win his first Grammy, the release of two hit albums, and the elevation of his touring from small clubs back to arenas and amphitheaters, Dave simply refused to pay commissions owing and forced 5B to file a lawsuit.”
Mustaine’s attorney, Richard Busch, did not immediately return a request for comment on the settlement.
In a June 2023 lawsuit, Brennan alleged that Mustaine had sought him out in 2014 to “manage his career and get it back on track,” following an extended downturn in commercial and critical success in which the beloved thrash metal band “seemed to have lost their way.” Over the next nine years, Brennan said he had “worked tirelessly” for Mustaine, including “helping him with his personal struggles” and successfully re-establishing Megadeth as “one of the greatest metal bands of all time.”
But the lawsuit claimed that Mustaine abruptly fired Brennan in early 2023, leaving him owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid touring commissions and hundreds of thousands more in merchandise commissions.
“Despite this success and their long-term relationship, on April 28, 2023, Mustaine, through his lawyer, unexpectedly and unceremoniously terminated Plaintiffs, stating no reason for the termination,” the lawsuit alleged. “The decision was made to help send business to Mustaine’s son, who has been trying to build a career in artist management.”
Months later, Megadeth and Mustaine fired back with a countersuit of their own, claiming that Brennan had been fired due to “repeated management failures” that had “dealt serious blows to Megadeth’s reputation and even David Mustaine’s physical health.”
Mustaine’s lawyers claimed that both sides had always agreed that each would “go their separate ways” following any split between Brennan and the band — and the lawsuit was simply retaliation because the ex-manager was “upset” that his “mishandling” of the band’s business had finally “caught up with him.”
“The cross-defendants’ unfounded claims are nothing more than an attempt to capstone their years of mistreatment with extortionate demands for money not earned by cross-defendants nor owed by cross-plaintiffs,” Busch wrote in the complaint.
Since the initial accusations and counter-claims, the case had spent months in discovery — the process of exchanging evidence in a litigation. No rulings on the merits of the cases have yet been issued.
Following the settlement of Brennan’s claims, Mustaine’s accusations of wrongdoing against him — including breach of contract and negligence — will continue toward an eventual trial.
Universal Music Group wants a federal judge to dismiss a copyright lawsuit claiming Mary J. Blige’s 1992 hit “Real Love” used a famed 1973 funk sample without a license, arguing the accusers have popped up “out of the blue” to sue over two tracks that “sound nothing alike.”
The case, filed in earlier this year by Tuff City Records, claims Blige’s track borrowed from “Impeach the President” by the Honey Drippers — a legendary piece of hip-hop source material with a drum track that’s been sampled or interpolated by Run-DMC, Dr. Dre, Doja Cat and many others over the years.
But in a response on Tuesday, UMG argues that Tuff City’s case is deeply flawed and must be tossed out of court at the outset.
Trending on Billboard
“Now, more than 30 years after ‘Real Love’ was released, plaintiff appears out of the blue alleging that ‘Real Love’ contains an uncleared sample from ‘Impeach the President,’ with no allegations concerning the works’ substantial similarity,” the music giant wrote. “The absence of that allegation is fatal.”
One key claim in Tuff City’s lawsuit is that UMG’s recorded music unit (UMG Recordings, Inc.) has already reached a settlement regarding the use of the “Impeach” sample on the “Real Love” sound recording, but that UMG’s publishing arm is unfairly refusing to do the same for the musical composition.
In Tuesday’s response, UMG confirmed the existence of that earlier settlement over the sound recording, but said it was entirely separate and complete “irrelevant” to a dispute over the composition. UMG’s attorneys said the settlement did not admit that “Real Love” infringed “Impeach” — but that even if it had, Tuff City was “confusing” a basic distinction that lies at the heart of music copyright law.
“Plaintiff … insinuates that defendant infringes simply because non-party UMG settled plaintiff’s claim of infringement [over] the sound recording,” the company wrote. “Because there exist two separate copyrights in music … a work can readily infringe one without infringing the other.”
Blige’s “Real Love” spent 31 weeks on the Hot 100 in 1992 and reached a peak of No. 7 on the chart. It has remained one of the star’s most enduring hits, with more than 105 million spins on Spotify and a movie adaptation released by Lifetime last year.
Tuff City sued UMG over the track in April, claiming it had “advised defendant repeatedly” about the allegedly uncleared sample, but that Universal had done nothing about it: “Defendant has repeatedly refused to engage plaintiff in substantive negotiations to rectify the foregoing, let alone agreed to compensate plaintiff for the past infringement or on an ongoing basis.”
The lawsuit did not name Blige herself as a defendant nor accuse her of any wrongdoing.
Tuff City, which owns a large catalog of old songs, is no stranger to copyright litigation – filing cases over tracks by Jay-Z, Beastie Boys, Christina Aguilera, Frank Ocean with claims that they featured unlicensed samples or interpolations. The company has even already sued over “Impeach the President,” claiming in a 1991 complaint that it had been illegally sampled on the LL Cool J tracks “Around the Way Girl” and “Six Minutes of Pleasure.”
The company has won plenty of rulings and settlements, but the litigation process has not always gone smoothly. In 2014, a judge dismissed one Tuff City case over Jay-Z’s “Run This Town” on the grounds that any alleged sample was “barely perceptible” after multiple listens. In that ruling, the judge chided Tuff City over its approach to the case, saying it “incorrectly … assumes that every copying of any part of another artist’s protected work is infringement.”
In Tuesday’s motion seeking to dismiss the “Real Love” case, UMG directly cited that 2014 ruling – arguing that the two songs “sound nothing alike” and that Tuff City had failed to argue otherwise.
“Unwilling to learn from the lessons of its past, plaintiff again seeks to assert copyright liability without plausibly pleading substantial similarity with respect to the musical compositions at issue here,” the company wrote. “The copyright claim must accordingly be dismissed.”
An attorney for Tuff City did not immediately return a request for comment.
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: The White Stripes end their copyright lawsuit against Donald Trump following his presidential election victory; prosecutors cite Lil Durk’s lyrics in his murder-for-hire case; the rapper Plies sues Megan Thee Stallion, GloRilla, and others over accusations of a sample-within-a-sample; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: White Stripes Drop Trump Lawsuit
Back in September, amid a wave of artists criticizing Donald Trump for using their music, the White Stripes went a step further. In a scathing copyright lawsuit, Jack White and Meg White accused Trump and his campaign of “flagrant misappropriation” of one of the “most well-known and influential musical works of all time.” In announcing it, White referred to Trump as a “fascist.”
Trending on Billboard
But it seems elections have consequences, even for music litigation.
Just days after Trump’s victory over Kamala Harris, attorneys for the White Stripes asked a federal judge to voluntarily dismiss their case. As is typical in such filings, the motion did not explain the decision to drop the case, and an attorney for the band declined to comment.
Why’d they do it? After all, Trump’s victory did not mean the lawsuit had to be dismissed. But following the end of the election, the juice may simply have not been worth the squeeze.
Other top stories this week…
RAP ON TRIAL, AGAIN – Federal prosecutors unveiled a new indictment against Lil Durk over allegations he ordered his crew to murder rival Quando Rondo. The new charges notably cited the rapper’s lyrics, claiming he had sought to “commercialize” the crime by “rapping about his revenge” in a 2022 track. The use of rap as evidence is controversial, as critics argue it threatens free speech and can sway juries by tapping into racial biases. Some states, like California, have restricted the practice, but it has continued largely unabated elsewhere, most notably in the recent criminal case against Young Thug in Atlanta.
PLIES SUES EVERYBODY – The rapper Plies filed a copyright lawsuit against Megan Thee Stallion, GloRilla, Cardi B and Souja Boy over allegations that the 2024 song “Wanna Be” features an uncleared sample from his 2008 track “Me & My Goons.” The lawsuit claims Megan and GloRilla stole Plies’ material indirectly – that they had used a legally-licensed sample of a Soulja Boy song, which itself illegally borrowed material from “Goons.”
ANOTHER TEKASHI PLEA DEAL – Tekashi 6ix9ine reached a deal with federal prosecutors to resolve his recent arrest over alleged violations of his supervised release stemming from his high-profile 2018 gang case. Under the deal, Tekashi agreed to serve one month in prison followed by several months of house arrest and other restrictions. The deal will also extend Tekashi’s supervised release, which had been set to expire in six months, to a full year following his upcoming prison term.
EDM ABUSE LAWSUIT – Electronic music producer Bassnectar asked a federal judge to dismiss a long-running lawsuit accusing him of sexually abusing three underage girls, arguing that all three alleged victims lied about their ages and had themselves instigated the relationships. The filing came more than three years after the three alleged victims filed their lawsuit, accusing the DJ of using his “power and influence to groom and ultimately sexually victimize underage girls.”
DIDDY UPDATES – The federal judge overseeing Sean “Diddy” Combs’ racketeering and sex trafficking case denied his request for a gag order against his alleged victims and their lawyers, ruling the demand “unprecedented,” “unwarranted” and a potential violation of the First Amendment. Elsewhere in the case, the embattled rapper renewed his calls for release on bail, cited the fact that former Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Mike Jeffries — another high-profile defendant accused of sex trafficking — was immediately released on a $10 million bond after he was arrested last month.
Less than a week after Donald Trump won the presidential election, the White Stripes have dropped their copyright lawsuit accusing him of using “Seven Nation Army” in a social media post without a license.
The case, filed in the September by Jack White and Meg White, accused Trump and his campaign of “flagrant misappropriation” of one of the “most well-known and influential musical works of all time.” In announcing it, White referred to Trump as a “fascist.”
But in one-sentence motion filed Sunday, attorneys for the rockers quietly dropped the lawsuit. The motion was filed “without prejudice,” meaning the White Stripes could theoretically refile their case at some point in the future, but it still likely means that the case is over for good.
Trending on Billboard
The White Stripes were one of many acts to sharply criticize the Republican candidate for using their music during the 2024 campaign. Beyoncé, Celine Dion, the Foo Fighters, ABBA and Sinead O’Connor‘s estate have all spoken out against the former president’s use of their songs.
White first spoke out on social media — blasting the Trump campaign over a clip, posted to Instagram and X by his deputy director of communications, in which Trump ascends the stairs of a plane as the iconic bass riff of “Seven Nation Army” plays: “Don’t even think about using my music you fascists.”
Two weeks later, he made good on those threats by filing a copyright infringement lawsuit in Manhattan federal court, claiming Trump infringed the band’s rights to the song and harmed the duo by suggesting they support his bid for another presidential term.
“The new association with defendant Trump that defendants have foisted upon plaintiffs through the infringing Trump videos is even more offensive to plaintiffs because plaintiffs vehemently oppose the policies adopted and actions taken by defendant Trump when he was President and those he has proposed for the second term he seeks,” attorneys for the White Stripes wrote.
But on Sunday, following Trump’s victory over VP Kamala Harris last week, attorneys asked the judge overseeing the case to voluntarily dismiss the band’s claims. As is typical in such filings, the motion did not explain the decision to drop the case, and an attorney for the band declined to comment.
Trump’s victory did not mean the lawsuit had to be dismissed. Presidential immunity – a much discussed concept when it comes to Trump’s high-profile criminal cases – would not have barred a case over actions he took before taking office. And even if Trump’s role as president made pursuing him personally more difficult, the case could have continued against his campaign (Donald J. Trump for President 2024 Inc.) and the staffer who posted the clip (Margo McAtee Martin).
But following the end of the election, the juice may simply have not been worth the squeeze. Federal copyright litigation can take years to resolve and is incredibly expensive, particularly when handled by the kind of white shoe attorneys from an elite law firm (Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP) that the White Stripes hired.
Jack and Meg could have pursued damages over the clip, including potentially more than $100K in so-called “statutory” damages or even more in “actual” damages that might have offset those costs. But the true goals of the litigation was likely to send a message and to bar further uses of the clip, both of which carry less weight now that the election is over.
Following last week’s vote, White took to Instagram to express his disgust with the outcome: “Trump won the popular vote. End of story. Americans chose a known, obvious fascist and now America will get whatever this wannabe dictator wants to enact from here on in.”
Trump and his campaign are still facing another pending music lawsuit from the estate of Isaac Hayes, which sued over his alleged use of the late singer’s “Hold On, I’m Coming” at rallies and in videos. The case remains in the earliest stages.
The campaign is also still facing a pending copyright case lawsuit from the 2020 election filed by Eddy Grant over the unauthorized use of his iconic “Electric Avenue.” In September, a federal judge ruled that Trump infringed the song by using it; a ruling on how much he owes in damages will be resolved in future proceedings.
A spokesman for the Trump campaign did not return a request for comment on the dismissal of the case.
The federal judge overseeing Sean “Diddy” Combs’ racketeering and sex trafficking case has denied his request for a gag order against his victims and their lawyers, ruling the demand “unprecedented” and “unwarranted.”
Attorneys for the embattled rapper claimed last month that “inflammatory extrajudicial statements” from victims and their attorneys were hurting his chances of a fair trial, but Judge Arun Subramanian ruled Friday (Nov. 8) that such “an extreme remedy” would threaten free speech.
“The court has an affirmative constitutional duty to ensure that Combs receives a fair trial,” the judge wrote. “But this essential … requirement must be balanced with the protections the First Amendment affords to those claiming to be Combs’s victims.”
“The unprecedented relief that Combs seeks on this motion is unwarranted,” the judge added.
Combs, also known as Puff Daddy and P. Diddy, was once one of the most powerful men in the music industry. But in September, he was indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of racketeering and sex trafficking over what they say was a sprawling criminal operation aimed at satisfying his need for “sexual gratification.” If convicted on all the charges, he faces a potential sentence of life in prison.
Last month, following the latest wave of civil abuse lawsuits against Combs, his lawyer asked Judge Subramanian to issue a sweeping gag order, claiming the lawyers behind the civil cases had made “shockingly prejudicial and false allegations” about him.
“Mr. Combs has a constitutional right to a fair trial, free from the influence of prejudicial statements in the press,” his attorney Marc Agnifilo wrote in the Oct. 20 motion. “These prospective witnesses and their lawyers have made numerous inflammatory extrajudicial statements aimed at assassinating Mr. Combs’s character in the press.”
But in Friday’s decision, Judge Subramanian ruled that the order Combs was seeking was “incredibly broad” and would have “sweeping First Amendment implications.”
“Not all alleged victims will be participants in this case, and a blanket restriction on their speech will silence individuals who may never have anything to do with the proceedings here,” the judge wrote.
The judge said he had “already taken steps to limit what can be said publicly” about the case and was “open to other tailored proposals that will help ensure a fair trial.” He also said Combs could take specific actions in the various civil lawsuits he was facing if the lawyers in those cases misbehave. But he said he could not do anything close to what Combs was seeking.
“A gag order … is an extreme remedy to be issued only as a last resort,” the judge wrote. “What Combs seeks goes even further.”
Separately on Friday, Combs’ lawyers also renewed their request that he be released from jail on a $50 million bond while he awaits trial. That request has been repeatedly denied since Combs was arrested, but the new filing cited the fact that former Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Mike Jeffries — another high-profile defendant accused of sex trafficking in New York — was immediately released on a $10 million bond after he was arrested last month.
“The government recently successfully requested pretrial release for two similarly situated defendants, including a CEO accused of sex trafficking dozens of young men, including through witness intimidation,” Agnifilo wrote in the new motion. “The conditions of release requested in Jeffries pale in comparison to the conditions proposed by Mr. Combs here.”