Legal
Page: 35
The Department of Justice dropped a wide-ranging antitrust complaint against Live Nation on Thursday (May 23), highlighting more than a dozen examples of the company’s “anticompetitive and exclusionary” behavior in accusing it of operating live music’s largest monopoly.
The evidence looks particularly bad for Live Nation chief executive Michael Rapino, whose own emails are being used against him to document alleged threats made against competitors while the company was operating under a federal consent decree tied to its 2010 merger with Live Nation.
Under the arrangement, regulators with the government had the right to obtain company documents, including communications, without a subpoena. The most damaging evidence is an email exchange involving Oak View Group’s Tim Leiweke and mega music manager Irving Azoff, who co-founded the arena development and management company together.
Trending on Billboard
Leiweke was the CEO of AEG, Live Nation’s main rival in the concert business, until 2012, when he was fired by company owner Phil Anschutz. After a brief stint running the Toronto Maple Leafs and its sports and entertainment interests in Canada, he returned to the United States and eventually founded Oak View Group (OVG) in 2015.
The government claims Rapino tried to leverage his company’s partnership with OVG to pressure private equity firm Silver Lake to kill off a rival ticketing company that Rapino allegedly believed represented a major threat to Ticketmaster.
If true, the story could be a major problem for Rapino, underscoring the government narrative that despite Live Nation’s massive market share, the CEO operates the company like a paranoid pugilist, willing to cross ethical and legal boundaries to eliminate tiny threats.
Silver Lake has been OVG’s strategic investment partner since the company’s founding, investing $100 million to launch it. Today, it has more than $2.5 billion tied up in OVG development projects. Silver Lake also owns TEG, an Australian concert promotion company that operates Ticketek, a large Australian ticket provider with more than 130 clients.
According to the 120-page complaint filed Thursday in federal court, “In 2021, Live Nation’s CEO complained to Oak View Group’s co-founder that TEG was ‘[f]ull on competitors.’ Oak View Group, in turn, conveyed to Silver Lake that Live Nation was ‘not happy.’” The complaint adds that Rapino then escalated his complaints to Silver Lake directly, stating: “I am all in on [Oak View Group] where the big play lies with venues – why insult me with this investment in ticketing/promotions etc.’”
According to the lawsuit, “Rapino threatened to pull its support from Oak View Group and instead back an Oak View Group competitor unless TEG stopped competing with Live Nation in the United States,” the complaint alleges.
“I can assure you the OVG investment is a much bigger win then T[E]G,” Rapino wrote in an email to an unnamed Silver Lake executive that’s included in the lawsuit. “It’s been a huge win for both sides– we have over 20 global arenas in development that neither could do without the other … do you really want LN backing [AEG’s venue development and management company]…? Seems like a dumb trade off??”
To aid in the pressure campaign, Azoff “reportedly refused to allow TEG to promote any of his large roster of artist clients,” the complaint alleges. It further states that Azoff told Rapino “that he was going to demand that Silver Lake sell TEG. [To which] Live Nation’s CEO replied ‘Love ya.’”
“Silver Lake now seems ‘intent on dumping teg’ and has asked, through the founder of Oak View Group, whether Live Nation would be interested in purchasing TEG,” the complaint reads in describing the back-and-forth.
Live Nation did not purchase TEG, but in early 2023, a deal was brokered for Silver Lake to sell the company to investment companies Blackstone and KKR. That deal collapsed in October over disagreements over the valuation of the company, which is now being readied for an IPO in Australia.
Live Nation issued a statement on this allegation, stating that the “claim reveals not only a disregard for the facts, but also deep hypocrisy.”
“The current DOJ and FTC have been vocal critics of private equity companies making multiple investments in the same industry because of competitive ‘entanglements,’” the statement continues. “So was Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino when, after it had already made an investment in OVG, Silver Lake Partners decided to invest in the Australian live entertainment company, TEG. Rapino’s complaint was fundamentally the same as the DOJ/FTC concern with private equity rollups: it created a conflict between OVG, which had become a close partner to Live Nation, and TEG. So, in December 2021 when a TEG employee wrote to say that it did not intend to compete with Live Nation in the U.S., Rapino replied to Silver Lake’s management that he did not care about TEG, but still had a problem with Silver Lake’s decision to make multiple conflicting investments in the industry.”
The statement also claims that “there is no truth that this brief exchange had anything to do with Silver Lake’s decision to sell its stake in TEG.”
In addition to the allegations around TEG, the government’s complaint further alleges that OVG, when it was first founded in 2015, was “particularly well-suited to be a real competitor to Live Nation in the United States concert promotion business” but changed its model to avoid competing with Live Nation.
The evidence from the time, however, shows that OVG and Live Nation had long billed themselves as partners. A November 2015 press release announcing OVG’s launch includes a quote from Rapino endorsing Leiweke’s business model, stating, “Both Tim and Irving are friends of Live Nation as well as personal friends. The concept of creating an economic model for both arena’s and touring artists that creates new revenue streams and develops an ‘anchor’ type of platform for music is one we share.”
The DOJ claims that Live Nation initially identified OVG as one of its “Biggest Competitor Threats” but that over time, the two firms morphed “from competitors into partners who found it easier and mutually beneficial to work together rather than compete.”
According to the government, OVG in fact operates as “a self-described ‘pimp’ and ‘hammer’ for Live Nation, with Leiweke once telling Rapino ‘[j]ust like I tell our folks we 100% always protect you and LN on your lanes.’”
In 2016, “after learning that Oak View Group offered to promote an artist Live Nation had previously promoted, Live Nation’s CEO immediately emailed Oak View Group, warning that such competition would only lead to artists demanding more compensation,” reads the complaint. It further includes an email in which Rapino wrote of the artist: “Whats up? We have done his [touring] and vegas[.] Let’s make sure we don’t let [the artist agency] now start playing us off.”
As outlined in the complaint, Leiweke immediately responded, “Our guys got a bit ahead. All know we don’t promote and we only do tours with Live Nation.”
Azoff later chimed in, writing “Growing pains,” subsequently noting that OVG executives “should never discuss comp [for artists],” and that OVG’s talent buyers would work for Live Nation.
The government argues that this discussion is an example of Leiweke and Azoff colluding with Rapino to limit the competitive bids sent to an artist in order to keep artists fees low. In another example cited in the complaint from 2022, Rapino admonished Leweike for making a direct offer to an artist to play an OVG venue instead of asking Live Nation to promote the show for OVG.
“Who would be so stupid to do this and play into [the artist agent’s] arms”? Rapino asked Leiweke in the email. Leiweke responded, “We have never promoted without you. Won’t,” before later writing, “[m]ore than happy to do these deals thru LN as I have always been aligned,” and that “I never want to be competitors.”
The complaint also alleges that Live Nation “exploits its long-term relationship with Oak View Group to flip venues to Ticketmaster, further cementing Ticketmaster’s power.”
According to the DOJ, in 2022, Live Nation and OVG signed an unspecified agreement that resulted in OVG recognizing “it has a significant financial interest in maintaining existing Ticketmaster contracts at its venues and converting other venues to Ticketmaster.”
At some point, according to the lawsuit, Leiweke told Rapino that the deal “allows us to tie up all owned and operated facilities to 10 year deals, develop a standard A and B market deal for all future projects and to convert all OVG 360 deals to TM now or as they expire for 10 years… Appreciate the consideration and partnership and all of us will work diligently on this so we are always aligned with TM.”
Live Nation responded to this claim in a statement: “The theory is that the contract gave Ticketmaster an unfair advantage in securing the business of independent venues that were managed by OVG because it creates financial incentives for OVG to ‘advocate for’ Ticketmaster. But there is nothing remotely anticompetitive about that. Commercial arrangements that involve incentive or marketing payments are common throughout this industry (and many others).” The statement adds, “Ticketmaster competed and won the contract on the merits because OVG determined it was the best ticketing system available.”
Kelly Clarkson has settled a lawsuit against her ex-husband Brandon Blackstock over commissions he was paid during his time as her manager, according to a new report in Rolling Stone.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Clarkson requested a dismissal of the case on Tuesday (May 21), while Blackstock and his father’s management firm, Starstruck Entertainment, requested to dismiss the case on Wednesday (May 22), according to court documents reviewed by Billboard — though the documents do not mention a settlement.
Billboard has reached out to Clarkson and Blackstock’s reps for more information but did not receive a response at the time of publication.
Trending on Billboard
The reported settlement comes two months after Clarkson filed a case in Los Angeles courton March 14 seeking a ruling that Starstruck Entertainment had been violating state labor rules stemming from the start of their relationship. The lawsuit sought the return of “any and all commissions, fees, profits, advances, producing fees or other monies” she paid to Starstruck Entertainment dating all the way back to 2007.
Clarkson filed for divorce from Blackstock in June 2020 after seven years of marriage. The case was finalized in 2022, and the singer agreed to pay her ex-husband monthly child support of $45,601 for their two children — nine-year-old daughter River Rose and eight-year-old son Remy Alexander — plus a one-time payment of $1.3 million.
Shortly after Clarkson filed for divorce, Starstruck sued her for alleged unpaid fees, claiming the company had “invested a great deal of time, money, energy, and dedication” into her and had “developed Clarkson into a mega superstar.”
In response, Clarkson filed a complaint with California’s Labor Commissioner, claiming that Blackstock and Starstruck had violated California’s Talent Agencies Act by serving as her managers as well as unlicensed talent agents who booked her business deals. In November, a Labor Commissioner ruled in Clarkson’s favor and Blackstock was ordered to repay Clarkson more than $2.6 million in commissions she paid him for handling a number of deals, including her role as a coach on The Voice. A month later, Blackstock and Starstruck challenged the ruling in court, asking for a Los Angeles judge to rule rather than the Labor Commissioner.
Cassie has issued a statement in response to the outpouring of support she’s received following the release of the video of her then-boyfriend Diddy physically assaulting her at a Los Angeles hotel in 2016.
The “Me & U” singer hadn’t spoken out since CNN posted the footage on May 17, with only her attorneys issuing statements. That changed on Thursday morning (May 23) when she addressed the situation and thanked those who have supported her.
“Thank you for all of the love and support from my family, friends, strangers and those have yet to meet. The outpouring of love has created a place for my younger self to settle and feel safe now, but this is only the beginning. Domestic Violence is THE issue. It broke me down to someone I never thought I would become. With a lot of hard work, I am better today, but I will always be recovering from my past,” she wrote on Instagram, making no mention of Diddy by name.
“Thank you to everyone that has taken the time to take this matter seriously. My only ask is that EVERYONE open your heart to believing victims the first time. It takes a lot of heart to tell the truth out of a situation that you were powerless in.”
Cassie continued: “I offer my hand to those that are still living in fear. Reach out to your people, don’t cut them off. No one should carry this weight alone. This healing journey is never ending, but this support means everything to me. Thank you. Love Always, Cassie.”
Kelly Rowland, Chloe Bailey, Lala Anthony, Taraji P. Henson and more showered Cassie with love and commended her bravery in her IG comment section.
In the footage dated March 5, 2016, and released by CNN, Diddy is seen striking Cassie at an elevator bank of a Los Angeles hotel and dragging her through the hallway after kicking her.
“The gut-wrenching video has only further confirmed the disturbing and predatory behavior of Mr. Combs,” said Ventura’s attorney, Douglas Wigdor, in a statement to Billboard at the time. “Words cannot express the courage and fortitude that Ms. Ventura has shown in coming forward to bring this to light.”
Diddy issued an apology on Sunday (May 17), saying his actions in the video were “inexcusable,” and added he was “disgusted” with his behavior.
“It’s so difficult to reflect on the darkest times in your life, but sometimes you got to do that,” Diddy said in the video posted to Instagram. “I was f–ked up. I mean, I hit rock bottom. But I make no excuses. My behavior on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions in that video. I’m disgusted. I was disgusted then when I did it, I’m disgusted now.”
Cassie and Diddy met in 2005 and dated on-and-off for a decade before splitting for good in 2018. Ventura filed a lawsuit against Diddy in Manhattan federal court in November 2023, alleging rape, sexual assault, physical abuse and more.
The two parties settled the dispute less than 24 hours later. Terms of the agreement were not disclosed. “I have decided to resolve this matter amicably on terms that I have some level of control,” Ventura said in a statement issued by her attorney at the time. “I want to thank my family, fans and lawyers for their unwavering support.”
With additional sexual assault lawsuits piling up, Combs has continued to deny all allegations made against him. “Let me be absolutely clear: I did not do any of the awful things being alleged,” he said in a statement on Dec. 6. “I will fight for my name, my family and for the truth.”
Read Cassie’s statement in full below.
A Department of Justice lawsuit against Live Nation for violating U.S. antitrust laws is imminent and could be filed as soon as Thursday (May 23), a source with knowledge of the DOJ’s plans tells Billboard.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The lawsuit is rumored to charge that Live Nation has a monopoly on event ticketing through Ticketmaster and that it illegally uses its monopoly power to grow its business and stifle competition. The DOJ has been investigating Live Nation for more than two years. With that investigation now wrapped, company president Joe Berchtold recently said he was that he was hopeful his company would avoid a legal showdown with the DOJ’s top antitrust lawyer, Jonathan Kanter.
“These are always serious discussions. We wouldn’t get to this point if they didn’t have concerns, but the good news is we’re still talking and they’ve said they have an open mind,” Berchtold told attendees at the J.P. Morgan Global Technology, Media and Communications conference in Boston on Tuesday (May 21).
Trending on Billboard
“Without getting into the real details of the conversation, I think it’s fair to say I continue to believe that we fundamentally have business practices that are fully defensible,” Berchtold added, before continuing: “We’re also open to figuring out common ground in order to get this settled and moved on. But we don’t know exactly what they want at this point still.”
Live Nation declined to comment for this story.
The Department of Justice’s case is believed to be centered around Ticketmaster’s use of exclusive ticketing contracts when signing up venues for its ticketing services. Typically, Ticketmaster pays venues an advance on the revenue that it generates from the fees it charges consumers as part of the ticket-buying process. The longer the contract, the larger the advance Ticketmaster can pay out.
DOJ officials don’t like the practice, arguing that it locks out new companies from competing in the ticketing space. Ticketmaster officials, however, argue that they are open to working with non-exclusive contracts — both the Greek Theatre in Hollywood and Red Rocks in Denver are open facilities where promoters use the ticketing provider of their choice — but that venues often rely on exclusive deals to meet their capital needs.
While Ticketmaster holds more exclusive ticketing contracts than any other company, it isn’t the only one to make use of them: Every major competitor pays upfront advances in exchange for exclusive ticketing agreements with venues and sports teams.
That includes SeatGeek, which reportedly paid $10 million in 2021 for exclusive rights to ticket events at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn for a seven-year term. Two years into the agreement, Billboard reported at the time, Barclays Center and BSE Global chief executive Sam Zussman threatened to publicize SeatGeek’s tech problems and breaches of contract if it didn’t immediately agree to terminate the deal.
SeatGeek eventually agreed to wind down its relationship with Barclays Center and was replaced by Ticketmaster. DOJ officials reportedly scrutinized the incident during its investigation of Live Nation.
In the wake of a falling out between RBD and its ex-manager and business partner Guillermo Rosas — a split made public in January when Billboard reported that the two had parted ways — the Mexican band has shared an official statement addressing the ongoing dispute.
In a statement issued Wednesday (May 22), RBD responded to previous claims made by Rosas and his company, T6H, to People En Español that there was “no financial mismanagement” tied to the band’s ultra-successful Soy Rebelde Tour. Hitting back at that characterization, RBD members Anahí, Christopher Von Uckermann, Dulce María, Christian Chávez and Maite Perroni claim that there were in fact “significant irregularities” revealed in a forensic accounting investigation led by Critin Cooperman, alleging that nearly $1 million remains unaccounted for after T6H began receiving funds related to the tour in December 2022.
According to the official statement issued by RBD’s lawyers and shared with Billboard, T6H and Citrin Cooperman — a services firm that acted as a business manager for the tour and also conducted the financial audit — were the “only entities responsible for the tour payments.” None of RBD’s members “had access to manage the money or make payments,” the band claims.
Trending on Billboard
Furthermore, the band says, T6H has “hindered the process” by not signing “key” documents necessary for the resolution of payments and the tour, which marked RBD’s grand return to touring after splitting in 2008.
Billboard reached out to T6H for comment but did not hear back by press time.
“Given the considerable amount of money involved and the discrepancies found, all our projects are currently on hold. We have had to pause this shared dream with you, including a possible continuation of the tour,” the statement continues. “Our goal has always been to resolve these discrepancies professionally. We remain committed to cooperating with all parties involved to achieve a fair and transparent resolution. Our integrity and the trust of our fans are paramount, and we will not rest until these matters fully resolve.”
In December, RBD wrapped its massive world tour, which, as of Nov. 30, had grossed $197.1 million since launching in August. Rosas also worked with the band as a concert promoter from 2006 to 2008.
Under a new business model designed for RBD’s comeback tour, the five members and Rosas were deemed equal partners in a new joint venture. The deal had the band splitting all new revenue, including for music, with Rosas, who in 2020 helped clear the rights to the group’s catalog. He also brought Live Nation on board as the promoter for the reunion tour and CAA for global representation of the band.
Apple has launched a legal challenge against the 1.8 billion euro ($1.95 billion) fine assessed by the European Commission for breaking competition laws and unfairly favoring its own music streaming service over rivals including Spotify.
According to court records, the U.S. tech giant filed an appeal with the EU’s Luxembourg-based General Court earlier this month.
Details of what is contained in the legal action, listed as: “Apple and Apple Distribution International v Commission,” are not yet publicly available. Representatives of Apple and the European Commission did not respond to requests to comment.
Apple had previously said it would appeal the EU’s fine, which was handed down in March following a long-running investigation triggered by complaints from Swedish streaming service Spotify.
Trending on Billboard
At the time of the ruling, the European Commission’s Margrethe Vestager said Apple had “abused its dominant position” for almost a decade by restricting rival music streaming apps from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the App Store.
As a result, many users paid “significantly higher prices for music streaming subscriptions” because of the high fee imposed by Apple on developers, which was then passed on to users, the commission said.
Apple has always strongly denied those claims, arguing that EU investigators had failed “to uncover any credible evidence of consumer harm.” The commission’s decision “ignores the realities of a market that is thriving, competitive, and growing fast,” the tech company said in a statement two months ago.
The nearly $2 billion fine was issued as part of an ongoing EU-wide effort to rein in the global dominance of big tech companies through large financial penalties and regulatory measures.
In March, just a few days after Apple received its penalty notice, new EU rules came into force governing how the largest online platforms operate in Europe as part of the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
The DMA requires the six tech giants designated as “gatekeepers” by the European Commission — Apple, Google parent company Alphabet, Amazon, TikTok-owner ByteDance, Meta and Microsoft — to comply with a raft of provisions, including not favoring in-house services at the expense of third-party providers.
The laws are enforceable by fines of up to 20% of total worldwide turnover (a.k.a. gross revenue) or, in extreme cases, the “last resort option” of forced divestments and the break-up of businesses.
In response, companies like Apple have been overhauling how they operate in the 27-member EU bloc, allowing European users to download rival app stores and lowering the fees charged to developers for purchases made through the App Store.
However, Apple’s plans to charge “high volume” services with over 1 million users a €0.50 ($0.54) “core technology fee” per download, per year, for using alternatives to the App Store has been heavily criticized by a number of European businesses, including Spotify and Deezer.
On March 25, the EU announced that it was investigating Apple, along with Meta and Alphabet, for potential breaches and non-compliance with the DMA’s terms.
Apple’s legal challenge against the commission’s $1.95 billion fine opens yet another battlefront with EU regulators. The tech company has previously had some success in the General Court — the European Union‘s second-highest court, which hears cases brought by companies against the commission.
In 2020, EU judges overturned a previous ruling by the commission that Apple had underpaid 13 billion euros in taxes to the Irish government. That case subsequently went to the European Court of Justice and is still slowly making its way through the legal process.
Apple’s latest court fight could be just as longwinded and take several years before any ruling is made by the General Court, which would also be open to appeal.
The latest escalation in the power struggle between HYBE and Min Hee-jin, the CEO of its subsidiary label ADOR, has arrived in the form of legal action from a separate label under the Korean conglomerate.
In a statement released Wednesday (May 22) local time in Seoul, HYBE label BELIFT LAB announced it is taking legal action against Min for defamation over her claims that the BELIFT team behind girl group ILLIT plagiarized her and ADOR’s work with NewJeans. The label is accusing Min of “obstruction of business and defamation,” according to the statement.
The news is just the latest development in a saga that has seen HYBE file a police report accusing Min of a “breach of trust” via an alleged plan to take over management control of ADOR, which was followed by an emotionally charged press conference on April 25 during which Min refuted the allegations.
Trending on Billboard
One of Min’s most widely discussed claims from the press conference was that BELIFT LAB “copied all the formulas that we had with NewJeans” for the recently launched ILLIT, including musical concept, fashion collaborations and more. As reported by the Korea JoongAng Daily, Min said the members of ILLIT are “innocent” and “it’s the adults that have sinned.”
Since that claim, online fighting between fans and social-media users on both sides of the conflict has brought various claims against multiple parties within the HYBE LABELS system, from artists to executives.
Further in its May 22 statement, BELIFT LAB declared that “Min’s accusations of plagiarism are not true” and that the label is “vigorously pursuing all necessary legal avenues to clarify the facts,” noting that the claims are Min’s opinions. The agency, which also houses boy band ENHYPEN, touched on the five members of ILLIT, noting that Yunah, Minju, Moka, Wonhee and Iroha “have been facing unjustified malicious attacks, ridicule, and slander,” adding that they “strongly urge these defamatory actions, ill-willed slander, the spreading of misinformation, and any form of personal attacks to stop.”
The news comes amid a major week for HYBE, as the company prepares for the highly anticipated releases of both Right Place, Wrong Person — the latest solo album from BTS‘ RM released under BIGHIT MUSIC — and How Sweet, a two-track single from NewJeans under ADOR, both out on Friday (May 24).
See the official English-language version of BELIFT LAB’s statement, as provided to Billboard by HYBE:
Hello,This is BELIFT LAB.
Today, May 22, our company has formally submitted a letter of complaint against Hee Jin Min for obstruction of business and defamation. This action follows Min’s unfounded and erroneous allegations against ILLIT, a group of artists represented by BELIFT LAB.
We would like to make it clear that Min’s accusations of plagiarism are not true. We have provided conclusive evidence to the appropriate judicial authority to refute them. We are committed to vigorously pursuing all necessary legal avenues to clarify the facts, regardless of the time it will take.
It is important to note that claims of plagiarism should not be determined by an individual’s biased opinions but should instead be assessed through established legal standards and processes. It is regrettable that our artists and employees are being subjected to unwarranted speculation and misinformation, impacting their hard work and integrity.
Additionally, members of ILLIT have been facing unjustified malicious attacks, ridicule, and slander, in spite of the fact that the members are unrelated to the accusations at hand. We strongly urge these defamatory actions, ill-willed slander, the spreading of misinformation, and any form of personal attacks to stop.
BELIFT LAB will spare no effort to protect our artists and employees.
Thank you.
Beyoncé, Sony Music and others are facing a copyright lawsuit over her chart-topping hit “Break My Soul,” filed by a New Orleans group that says she sampled from a Big Easy rapper who had illegally lifted lyrics from their earlier song.
In a complaint filed Wednesday (May 22) in Louisiana federal court, members of Da Showstoppaz accuse Beyoncé (Beyoncé Knowles Carter) of infringing their 2002 song “Release A Wiggle” on “Break My Soul,” which spent two weeks atop the Billboard Hot 100 in 2022.
Rather than stealing their material directly, the group alleges that Beyoncé infringed their copyrights by legally sampling the 2014 song “Explode” by the New Orleans rapper Big Freedia. That track, they say, illegally borrowed several key lyrics from their song.
Trending on Billboard
“While Mrs. Carter … and others have received many accolades and substantial profits … Da Showstoppaz’s have received nothing—no acknowledgment, no credit, no remuneration of any kind,” the group’s attorneys wrote, also naming Big Freedia (Freddie Ross) as a defendant.
“Explode” was one of several high-profile samples on “Break My Soul,” which also heavily pulled from Robin S.‘s house song “Show Me Love.” After the release of the song, Big Freedia thanked “Queen Beyoncé” and said she had been “honored to be a part of this special moment.”
At the center of the new dispute is the phrase “release yo wiggle” and several related variants, which Da Showstoppaz call “unique phrases” that they coined in their song. They say Big Freedia — a well-known rapper in New Orleans’ bounce music scene — infringed their copyrights by using similar phrases in “Explode.”
“The infringing phrase ‘release yo’ wiggle’ and several other substantially similar phrases are featured prominently in the song and evenly spread out across Explode’s two-minute and forty-seven second runtime,” the group’s lawyers wrote. “Any reasonable person listening to ‘Release A Wiggle’ and ‘Explode’ would conclude that the songs are substantially similar.”
Such allegations could face long odds in court. Copyright law typically does not protect short, simple phrases, and a court could potentially dismiss the case on the grounds that Big Freedia was free to use such lyrics even if The Showstoppaz used them first.
But the group’s lawyers aren’t concerned, saying they “have a copyright to their unique and distinctive lyrics” that was clearly infringed by Big Freedia: “The coined term and phrase ‘release a/yo wiggle’ has now become closely synonymous with Big Freedia, thereby contributing to Big Freedia’s fame. However, Big Fredia did not compose or write the phrase, and Big Freedia never credited Da Showstoppaz as the source.”
According to the lawsuit, Da Showstoppaz first learned about Big Freedia’s song when they heard “Break My Soul.” They say they notified Beyoncé and others of the alleged infringement infringement last month, but that she has refused to take a license.
Reps for Beyoncé and Sony Music did not immediately return a request for comment on the allegations.
An Earth, Wind & Fire tribute act will pay the legendary R&B group $750,000 in damages for using its trademarked name in ways that a federal judge called “deceptive and misleading.”
The payment, announced in a court filing Tuesday, will effectively end a year-long lawsuit in which the band alleged that the tribute act — “Earth, Wind & Fire Legacy Reunion” – infringed the trademark rights to the famous name by suggesting it was the real thing.
Earlier this year, the federal judge overseeing the case sided with Earth, Wind & Fire, ruling that the tribute act’s conduct had been “deceptive and misleading.” A trial had been scheduled to figure out how much Legacy Reunion would need to pay, but the two sides reached an undisclosed settlement on that question last week.
In Tuesday’s filing, the judge disclosed the total that Legacy Reunion had agreed to pay – $750,000, plus interest — a rare step following settlements, which are typically kept private. Neither side immediately returned requests for comment.
Trending on Billboard
Earth, Wind & Fire has continued to tour since founder Maurice White died in 2016, led by longtime members Philip Bailey, Ralph Johnson and White’s brother, Verdine White. The band operates under a license from an entity called Earth Wind & Fire IP, a holding company controlled by Maurice White’s sons that formally owns the rights to the name.
Last year, that company filed the current lawsuit, accusing Legacy Reunion of trying to trick consumers into thinking it was the real Earth, Wind & Fire. Though it called itself a “Reunion,” the lawsuit said the tribute band contained only a few “side musicians” who had briefly played with Earth, Wind & Fire many years ago.
“Defendants did this to benefit from the commercial magnetism and immense goodwill the public has for plaintiff’s ‘Earth, Wind & Fire’ marks and logos, thereby misleading consumers and selling more tickets at higher prices,” the group’s lawyers wrote at the time.
Tribute acts — groups that exclusively cover the music of a particular band — are legally allowed to operate, and they often adopt names that allude to the original. But they must make clear that they are only a tribute band, and they can get into legal hot water if they make it appear that they are affiliated with or endorsed by the original.
Ruling on the case last month, Judge Federico A. Moreno said the evidence pointed “overwhelmingly” in the band’s favor. In particular, the judge cited angry social media posts and emails from fans who attended the “Reunion” shows because they thought it was the original band — proof of the kind of “actual confusion” that’s crucial evidence in a trademark lawsuit.
“It is not a far cry to think that an average consumer looking for an Earth, Wind & Fire concert would believe that they could acquire that experience from either plaintiff or defendants,” the judge wrote.
Following Tuesday’s order, the only remaining issue in the case is an injuction permanently banning Legacy Reunion from infringing the name. That issue will be subject to future rulings clarifying exactly what it will cover.
Sean “Diddy” Combs has been accused of sexual assault in a new lawsuit filed by a woman who claims the hip-hop mogul sexually assaulted her in a recording studio bathroom in 2003.
According to the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court in New York by attorneys Michelle Caiola and Jonathan Goldhirsch, Crystal McKinney claims she met Combs at a Men’s Fashion Week dinner in Manhattan on the invite of a fashion designer she knew. While attending the dinner, during which she alleges that Combs came onto her “in a sexually suggestive manner,” she says he invited her to hang out at his recording studio.
After arriving at the studio, where McKinney says several other men were present, she claims she was given alcohol and a marijuana joint that she later came to believe was laced “with a narcotic or other intoxicating substance.” She says Combs then led her to a bathroom, where he began kissing her without her consent before shoving her head in his crotch and forcing her to perform oral sex over her protests.
McKinney, who was then working as a professional model, claims that she later “awakened in shock” to find herself in a taxi heading back to the apartment of the designer who had invited her to the dinner. At this point, she “realized that she had been sexually assaulted by Combs,” the complaint reads. The lawsuit adds that following the alleged assault, McKinney’s “modeling opportunities quickly began to dwindle and then evaporated entirely” after Combs allegedly “blackballed” her in the industry. After falling into “a tailspin of anxiety and depression,” she claims she attempted suicide in 2004 and later fell into drug and alcohol addiction to cope with the trauma of the alleged assault.
The new lawsuit was filed under the NYC Gender Motivated Violence Act, which created a two-year lookback window beginning in March 2023 that allows survivors of gender-motivated violence to sue their abusers for alleged incidents that occurred outside the statute of limitations.
Also named as defendants in the lawsuit are Combs’ label Bad Boy Records, its parent company Universal Music Group and Combs’ clothing company Sean John Clothing, all of which McKinney claims “enabled” the alleged assault by “actively maintaining and employing Combs in a position of power” despite the fact that they allegedly “knew or should have known that Combs posed a risk of sexual assault.”
McKinney is asking for damages for mental and emotional injury, distress, pain and suffering and injury to her reputation as well as punitive damages, among other relief.
Representatives for Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment, Sean John Clothing and Universal Music Group did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s requests for comment.
Tuesday’s complaint marks the sixth sexual misconduct lawsuit to have been filed against Combs over the past several months. The torrent of lawsuits was kicked off by a November 2023 complaint filed by his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura, who alleged repeated abuse by the mogul over the course of more than a decade.
Though Ventura’s lawsuit was settled just one day later, a 2016 security video published by CNN on Friday (May 17) showed Combs physically assaulting Ventura in a hotel hallway. Though Combs denied all of Ventura’s initial allegations, in the wake of the video’s release he issued an apology calling his behavior in the clip “inexcusable.” L.A. District Attorney George Gascón later released a statement saying that Combs could not be prosecuted over the assault due to the statute of limitations.
Combs has strongly denied all allegations of sexual assault made against him. On Dec. 6, he released a statement that read: “Let me be absolutely clear: I did not do any of the awful things being alleged. I will fight for my name, my family and for the truth.”
In November, Combs stepped down as chairman of his digital media company Revolt before reportedly selling his stake in the company in March. Also in March, federal agents conducted raids of Combs’ L.A. and Miami homes “in connection” with a federal sex trafficking investigation, according to CNN.