Legal
Page: 35
BMI is taking SiriusXM to court after the two sides failed to reach a deal on royalty rates during more than two years of negotiations, arguing that the satcaster is “no longer a startup” and must pay more to songwriters.
In a petition filed in court today, BMI asked a Manhattan federal judge to uphold a higher royalty rate it has asked SiriusXM to pay – citing increased revenue for the radio giant and a shift toward more lucrative digital streaming.
“SiriusXM’s financial performance, and its expansion of its digital offerings, make clear it is no longer a startup in a nascent industry,” lawyers for the rights group wrote. “Yet, despite achieving its secure and successful position, Sirius has continued to pay songwriters — who create the music essential to SiriusXM’s business — at rates that are below those negotiated decades ago when satellite radio was an infant industry with an uncertain future.”
A spokeswoman for SiriusXM declined to comment on BMI’s case.
Trending on Billboard
BMI is a so-called performance rights organization that collects copyright royalties owed to publishers and songwriters when their songs are performed publicly, offering blanket licenses that allow for the use of more than 22 million tracks. When BMI cannot agree with a licensee like SiriusXM, either side can ask a federal judge to decide the dispute and set a reasonable rate.
In doing so on Thursday, BMI pointed to what it sees as key shifts in SiriusXM’s business model since the two last negotiated a licensing deal in 2018 – namely, an increasing reliance on internet streaming rather than old-school satellite radio.
“As a result of these changes, SiriusXM’s business has shifted and is becoming more akin to a music streaming service than a traditional satellite radio or broadcast radio,” BMI’s attorneys wrote. “Digital music services pay higher rates to BMI than satellite radio, and the new SiriusXM rate should reflect this expansion of digital performances.”
The specific terms of the royalty rate that BMI is seeking from SiriusXM were not disclosed in court filings because BMI said it was “competitively sensitive.” The new rate would cover the period from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2026.
In a statement announcing the case on Thursday, BMI said that songwriters “should not have to accept an outdated rate that significantly undervalues their music.”
“After attempting to negotiate with SiriusXM in good faith for more than two years, we were compelled to file this action given their insistence on underpaying the creators of the music that drives the majority of their business,” BMI president Mike O’Neill wrote. “We will continue to fight for fair and appropriate rates when we believe the music created by our songwriters and composers is being significantly undervalued.”
The filing of the new case was celebrated Thursday by the National Music Publishers’ Association, with president and CEO David Israelite saying the group was “extremely pleased” with BMI’s decision to “demand what’s fair.”
“Companies like SiriusXM have massive profit margins fueled by music creators,” Israelite said in a statement. “We fully support BMI in their fight for the value of songs.”
BMI isn’t the only rights group in a dispute with SiriusXM over its shift toward streaming. In a lawsuit last year, SoundExchange accused the company of using bookmaking trickery – namely, manipulating how it bundles its satellite and streaming offerings – as part of a scheme to “grossly underpay” royalties by more than $150 million. SiriusXM later fired back, denying the lawsuit’s “misguided allegations.” That case remains pending.
Go read BMI’s full petition against SiriusXM here:
A federal judge says Madison Square Garden owner James Dolan must sit for a deposition over the infamous 2017 ejection of ex-NBA player Charles Oakley from the Manhattan arena, ruling that the CEO “had a courtside seat” for the incident.
MSG had argued that Dolan has little relevant info for the remaining issues in the long-running lawsuit, in which Oakley is accusing the company of assault and battery. MSG’s lawyers suggested that the bid for a deposition was just one more effort to “harass” Dolan amid a “rancorous” lawsuit.
But in a ruling Tuesday, Judge Richard Sullivan rejected those arguments and ordered Dolan to be deposed – saying that the executive had “a courtside seat to the action here” and “likely possesses relevant knowledge that cannot be obtained from other witnesses.”
Trending on Billboard
“At the most basic level, Dolan was an eyewitness to the removal of Oakley and can provide personal observations as to Oakley’s behavior that evening and the force used to remove him,” the judge wrote.
In a statement Thursday, an MSG spokesperson told Billboard: “This is just another example of how the legal maneuverings of Charles Oakley and his lawyers continue to waste the time and resources of everyone involved.” In his own statement, Oakley’s attorney Valdi Licul said: “We are pleased the court rejected Mr. Dolan’s efforts to avoid giving sworn testimony about Mr. Oakley’s removal from MSG. We look forward to questioning him under oath.”
Oakley, a beloved former New York Knick with a contentious relationship with Dolan, was removed from the Garden on Feb. 8, 2017 after an altercation with security guards. Accounts of the incident varied widely; Oakley claimed he had done nothing wrong, but MSG said he had engaged in “abusive behavior” before he was kicked out.
Dolan is the majority owner/CEO of Madison Square Garden Entertainment, a live music giant that operates the famed NYC arena in addition to Manhattan’s Radio City Music Hall, the Las Vegas Sphere and other prominent venues. He is also the majority owner of Madison Square Garden Sports Corp., which owns the Knicks.
Months after the incident, Oakley sued both Dolan and MSG, alleging a wide range of legal wrongdoing. Since then, the case has been on a seven-year journey up and down the federal court system.
Sullivan initially tossed the lawsuit in 2020, but a federal appeals court later overturned the ruling and revived the case. After litigation resumed, the same judge later tossed it again, pointing to video evidence showing Oakley had “unilaterally escalated the confrontation, leading to his eventual forcible removal.” But last year, an appeals court overturned parts of that ruling, too.
The current iteration of the lawsuit targets only MSG, not Dolan personally, and only includes claims of assault and battery, which are centered on whether the company’s employees used unreasonable force to remove him from the arena.
With Oakley’s lawyers demanding a deposition to help prove those claims, MSG argued that Dolan was a so-called apex witness – the kind of top-level executive that judges rarely pull into court cases unless they’re directly involved in the alleged wrongdoing.
But in his decision on Tuesday, Judge Sullivan said that Dolan was a “far cry from the prototypical apex witness,” since Oakley claims that Dolan personally spoke with a security guard prior to the incident and later signaled for them to remove Oakley from the arena.
“Dolan is one of only two people who can attest to the contents of that conversation,” the judge wrote. “Only Dolan can explain whether he signaled the guard and, if so, what his signal was intended to convey.”
Sullivan didn’t give Oakley’s attorneys everything they wanted. They were also seeking a court order that would allow them to dig through four years of Dolan’s emails, but the judge gave them only access to emails from a three-week span immediately after the incident.
“Oakley has not articulated how Dolan’s emails from years after the incident are likely to yield evidence concerning whether the MSG defendants used reasonable force when removing Oakley from MSG on the night in question,” the judge wrote. “Such extensive discovery would be disproportional to the needs of this case.”
No date for a deposition has yet been scheduled in court records, and Dolan’s attorneys could seek the challenge Tuesday’s ruling before he actually sits down with Oakley’s attorneys.
Justin Timberlake is moving forward with a plea deal to resolve his drunk driving case, according to the Associated Press.
Three months after he was arrested on suspicion of driving a vehicle while intoxicated in the Hamptons, the news site reports that the 43-year-old superstar will plead guilty to a less serious offense than he was initially charged with this Friday (Sept. 13). Officials have already confirmed that he’s set to appear in Sag Harbor Village Court on that date to enter his plea.
Billboard has reached out to Timberlake’s rep for comment. His lawyer, Ed Burke, was unable to comment at press time.
The news comes a little over a month after the *NSYNC alum pleaded not guilty to a misdemeanor drunken driving charge in an August virtual court appearance, where his driving privileges were suspended by Sag Harbor Village Justice Carl Irace. CNN also reported at the time that the judge had admonished Burke for comments the attorney made to the media about the case ahead of the arraignment.
The newly set plea deal will aim to wrap up Timberlake’s DWI case, which began June 17 after police reported witnessing him “failing to stop at a duly posted stop sign and failing to maintain his lane of travel” while operating a 2025 BMW in New York. The arresting officer added in a court filing that “the defendant was operating said vehicle in an intoxicated condition in that his eyes were bloodshot and glassy, a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage was emanating from his breath, he was unable to divide attention, he had slowed speech, he was unsteady afoot, and he performed poorly on all standardized field sobriety tests.”
Officer Michael Arkinson also noted that the 10-time Grammy winner had told him during the arrest, “I had one martini and I followed my friends home.”
Despite the police reports, Timberlake’s lawyer has disputed that his client was drunk at all at the time of the arrest. During a hearing in July, Burke insisted that the “SexyBack” singer should have never been arrested, saying, “the police made a number of very significant errors in this case.”
Timberlake was midway through his Forget Tomorrow World Tour when he was arrested. Even so, the trek has largely gone off without a hitch, with the performer going on to perform in Chicago, New York City and more locations across the U.S. this summer before embarking on a European leg in July. The full run is currently on track to gross more than $250 million over 87 dates, according to Billboard Boxscore data.
Sean “Diddy” Combs is facing yet another abuse lawsuit, this time filed by a participant on MTV’s Making the Band and longtime member of his band who says he harassed and assaulted her during “years of inhumane working conditions.”
In a complaint filed Tuesday in Manhattan federal court, Dawn Richard says the embattled hip hop mogul “manipulated” her into thinking that “abuse and exploitation were required for female artists to succeed in the music industry.”
Richard claims she witnessed Combs abuse his ex-girlfriend Casandra “Cassie” Ventura on multiple occasions – and that recent lawsuits from Ventura and others sparked her to speak out.
“As more women courageously come forward, plaintiff has been empowered by this collective strength and now adds her voice to the growing chorus of victims bravely sharing their harrowing stories,” lawyers for Richard write. “Together, they seek justice and stand in solidarity, as the latest victims of the #Me Too movement in the music industry.”
Once one of the most powerful men in the music industry, Diddy has been hit with at least eight civil lawsuits alleging sexual abuse over the past year, including claims by Ventura that were later followed by a video showing him assaulting her. The hip-hop mogul is also facing an apparent federal criminal investigation after authorities raided his homes in March.
Though the rapper has denied the legal allegations against him, he issued an apology in May over his conduct captured on the video of the Ventura attack: “My behavior on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions in that video.”
In her new lawsuit, Richard says she first met Combs after she was selected for season 3 of Making The Band, a popular MTV reality show in the early 2000s featuring aspiring artists working under the tutelage of Combs.
She was eventually chosen as a winner of that season and joined the Diddy-run girl group Danity Kane, which released albums two albums in the late 2000s. When the band broke up in 2009, Richard says she transitioned into a member of another band called Diddy – Dirty Money.
During each stop in the Diddy universe, Richard says she was subjected to harmful behavior. While filming the TV show, she says Combs “deprived Ms. Richard and her Danity Kane bandmates of basic needs such as adequate food and sleep.” As a member of Dirty Money, he says the mogul repeatedly harassed and assaulted her, including groping her during fitting sessions.
Richard also claims to have witnessed illegal behavior toward others, including a 2009 party in Atlanta after the Soul Train Awards in which she says she was Combs “arranged for dozens of young women and girls — some of whom appeared to be underage – to be transported to the party.”
“Many of them appeared lethargic or passed out while Mr. Combs and his guests performed sexual acts on them,” Richard’s lawyers write. “Ms. Richard felt shocked and horrified at the sight of Mr. Combs and his guests violating incapacitated young women.”
She also claims to have seen specific acts of abuse toward Combs’ ex-partners. In one, she says she witnessed his ex-wife, Kim Porter, leaving his studio “in tears with visible facial injuries including a lacerated lip.” On “numerous” other occasions, Richard says she saw Combs abuse “brutally beat” Ventura.
“His persistent abuse included choking and strangling Ms. Ventura, striking her with his hands and with objects, slapping her, punching her, and throwing items at her, including a scalding hot pan,” attorneys for Richards write.
Ventura sued Combs over similar allegations in November, but the pair reached a settlement to end the lawsuit just days later.
In technical terms, Richard is accusing Combs of a slew of specific forms of wrongdoing, including violating New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Act and California’s Sexual Abuse and Cover Up Accountability Act, as well as various state and federal workplace protections against sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation. She’s also accusing him of assault, sexual battery, false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The lawsuit also features intellectual property claims, including that Diddy infringed copyrights to her music.
A representative for Combs did not immediately return a request for comment.
A year after Joe Jonas filed for divorce from former Game of Thrones actress Sophie Turner, a Florida judge declared the former couple divorced and single. According to a copy of the agreement obtained by Billboard, on Friday a Miami-Dade County judge approved a confidential, moderated agreement between the two that splits their assets and details spousal support and custody of the pair’s two daughters, four-year-old Willa and two-year-old Delphine.
The sign-off came a year after the 35-year-old Jonas Brothers singer filed for divorce from Turner, 28, ending their five-year marriage. Judge Gina Beovides declared the marriage “irretrievably broken” and said the couple entered into a voluntary, confidential parenting plan and separation agreement that was in the best interest of the family. “Specifically as relates to the parties’ Parenting Plan, [Jonas] previously voluntarily dismissed all relief and claims sought in relation to said Parenting Plan,” read Judge Beovides’ final judgement paperwork, dated Sept. 6.
Trending on Billboard
Before their split became acrimonious over a disagreement over custody of their children, the couple issued a joint statement last September in which they said they were parting on friendly terms. “After four wonderful years of marriage we have mutually decided to amicably end our marriage,” their announcement began. “There are many speculative narratives as to why but, truly this is a united decision and we sincerely hope that everyone can respect our wishes for privacy for us and our children.”
At the time Jonas filed for divorce he deemed the marriage “irretrievably broken” and filed paperwork seeking joint custody of the children. The former couple first met in 2016 before tying the knot in two ceremonies in 2019, a surprise Las Vegas wedding in May of that year, followed by a lavish wedding at the next month in the South of France.
Weeks after Jonas’ divorce filing, English actress Turner sued her ex for custody of their daughters, alleging that the singer had engaged in “wrongful retention of of two children… from their habitual residence of England,” in a bid to force Jonas to hand over the girls’ passports so they could join her in her native country.
At the time, the girls — who were born in the U.S. but have dual citizenship — were with Jonas in New York while he was on tour with the Jonas Brothers; Turner claimed that the couple had agreed to raise their children in England before the marriage fractured. She also claimed that she learned about the divorce filing through media reports, though he said they had discussed it several times.
In January, Turner dropped her “wrongful retention” suit when the pair reached a co-parenting agreement.
Johnson & Johnson is facing a lawsuit that accuses the pharma giant of “rampant infringement” of copyrighted instrumental music in YouTube and Facebook videos.
In a complaint filed last week in Los Angeles federal court, Associated Production Music (APM) claims that J&J released nearly 80 different internet videos featuring unlicensed “production music” — an industry term for stock tracks created for use in videos, podcasts and other content.
“At no point did defendant ever obtain APM’s license, authorization, or consent to synchronize the Recordings with the Videos,” the company’s lawyers write. “Moreover, despite being repeatedly contacted by APM regarding Defendant’s unlicensed uses of the Recordings, Defendant has refused to obtain proper licenses or admit wrongdoing.”
APM, a joint venture of Sony Music Publishing and Universal Music Publishing, describes itself as the top purveyor of production music in the country, controlling huge libraries of songs that have appeared in TV shows (Stranger Things, Game of Thrones and Spongebob Squarepants), movies (Lady Bird, The Shape of Water and The Big Sick) and video games (Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare and MLB: The Show). One particularly notable APM song is “Heavy Action,” the theme to Monday Night Football.
Trending on Billboard
Earlier this year, APM says it discovered that J&J had been using the company’s songs without permission. The lawsuit lists out 79 different videos featuring 30 different APM songs, like a YouTube video posted by J&J in May 2021 called “Nurse Leaders Disrupting Healthcare.” The video, which features an upbeat instrumental track behind narration, allegedly used an APM track called “Driving Inspiration” without securing a license.
The lawsuit is light on details, and it’s unclear how a sophisticated company came to release dozens of videos without securing licenses for the music. A representative for J&J did not immediately return a request for comment on the allegations.
Though the songs in question are hardly Hot 100 hits, intentionally using them without a license would still be a costly decision for J&J. Under federal copyright law, a judge can award as much as $150,000 per song infringed if a defendant acted willfully — nearly $12 million for all the songs involved.
BTS‘ Suga has been fined without a trial for driving an electric scooter under the influence of alcohol in August, officials told South Korean news agency Yonhap on Tuesday (Sept. 10). He also previously had his license suspended over the same incident.
Used for minor offenses, a summary indictment requests that the court impose a fine or confiscation through an expedited process without a full trial.
The news comes more than a month after the 31-year-old K-pop star was questioned by police after falling from his electric scooter in the Hannam neighborhood of the Yongsan district Aug. 6. According to Yonhap, the star’s blood alcohol concentration was 0.227 percent, nearly three times the 0.08 percent threshold. The news agency also reports that according to the Road Traffic Act, violations in which the BAC is above 0.2 percent indicates two to five years behind bars, as well as a fine of 10 million won (approximately $7,442) and 20 million won (approximately $14,884).
Trending on Billboard
Billboard has reached out to BTS’ reps for comment.
Shortly after the incident, Suga — who is currently in the middle of serving out his mandatory service in the South Korean military — revealed that his license had been revoked. He also said sorry to fans in two heartfelt posts on Weverse, explaining in the first that he didn’t realize he couldn’t operate an electric scooter while under the influence, which he’d attempted after going out to dinner.
“In the process of setting up an electric kickboard at the front door of the house, I fell alone, and there was a police officer around me, so I took a breath test,” he continued in the Aug. 7 post, apologizing to “everyone who was hurt by [his] careless and wrong actions.”
BTS’ record label, BigHit, also issued a statement at the time, apologizing “for the disappointment caused by the artist’s inappropriate behavior.” “As a social service agent during his military service, he is prepared to accept any disciplinary actions from his place of work for causing a social disturbance,” the label added at the time. “We will take greater care to ensure that such incidents do not happen again in the future.”
Toward the end of August, Suga again took responsibility for his actions. “It’s all my fault,” he wrote in his second post about the incident on Weverse. “My carelessness is giving everyone who cares about me a hard time. I will try not to do anything wrong again and live with repentance. Due to this incident, I have greatly damaged the precious memories I made with the members and fans and put a lot of pressure on the name of the BTS.”
Since the incident, BTS fans have stood behind the musician, even issuing a statement in support of all members of the global group in recent days. “Global ARMY fan bases, both domestic and international, have gathered to affirm with one voice that we continue to support all seven members of BTS,” read part of the statement representing 127 ARMY divisions globally.
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: Prosecutors file a first-of-its-kind criminal case against an alleged streaming fraudster who made $10 million with fake songs; the White Stripes file a copyright case against Donald Trump over use of their music; Spotify wins a strongly-worded ruling dismissing a long-running lawsuit filed by Eminem’s publisher; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Streaming Fraud Finally Goes To Court
When Manhattan federal prosecutors indicted a North Carolina musician named Michael Smith last week, accusing him of stealing $10 million in streaming royalties as part of a “brazen fraud scheme,” they told a story that much of the music industry already knew. Streaming fraud – artificially boosting traffic for certain songs – has been a growing problem for years. One study found that 1% to 3% of plays in France in 2021 were fraudulent; a 2022 report by fraud-detection service Beatdapp estimated that more than 10% of global streams were fake. And this isn’t the scam from “Office Space,” stealing fractions of a penny from a faceless tech giant. Because royalties are calculated as a percentage of a finite pie, every phony stream represents real money being diverted away from music that consumers actually played and the artists who created it. In the first-of-its-kind indictment, the feds say Smith created thousands of fake songs, then used an army of bots to play them billions of times on Spotify and other streamers. At one point, Smith estimated that he could play his songs 661,440 times each day, raking in as much as $1.2 million per year. Prosecutors say Smith’s plot was aided by artificial intelligence – another growing problem for the industry. When he couldn’t create enough fake tracks to make the scam work, Smith allegedly partnered with an unnamed executive at an A.I. music company to produce grist for his mill, funneling money back in the form of percentage cuts. For more details go read Kristin Robinson’s stories – on the filing of the charges, and on an AI company with strong ties to the accused fraudster.
Trending on Billboard
Other top stories this week…
“SUES FASCISTS” – The White Stripes filed a copyright lawsuit against Donald Trump for using their iconic “Seven Nation Army” in a social media post, arguing that any association with the president was “offensive” because they “vehemently oppose” his policies and his bid for another term in the White House. In announcing the case, Jack White included a screenshot of the complaint with the caption “this machine sues fascists” – an allusion to Woody Guthrie’s famous use of a sticker reading “this machine kills fascists” on his guitar during World War II. The White Stripes are the latest in a long list of musical artists to threaten or take legal action against Trump over his use of music. LOSE YOUR CASE – Spotify defeated a long-running lawsuit filed by Eminem’s publisher, Eight Mile Style, that claimed the rapper’s music had been streamed illegally “billions” of times on the platform. Rather than order Spotify to pay, the judge sharply criticized Eight Mile for suing in the first place, ruling that the company had effectively manufactured the lawsuit in an effort to win legal damages. “Eight Mile Style was not a hapless victim,” the judge wrote. DIDDY DAMAGES – A Michigan inmate named Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith won a $100 million default judgment against Sean “Diddy” Combs in a sexual assault lawsuit — an eye-popping figure that was handed down after the rapper did not show up in court or file any formal response to the case. Following the ruling, Combs’ lawyers strongly denied that the rapper was served with the lawsuit and said he “looks forward to having this judgment swiftly dismissed.” GUESS WHO TRUCE – The members of classic rock band The Guess Who settled a bitter trademark lawsuit in which two bandmates (Randy Bachman and Burton Cummings) referred to a recent iteration of the group run by two others (Jim Kale and Garry Peterson) as nothing more than a “cover band.” COPYRIGHT CLAPBACK – Verizon fired back at a lawsuit filed by Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment over allegations of “staggering” piracy on its network. The labels claim Verizon “buried its head in the sand” and enabled illegal filesharing, but in a motion to dismiss, the telecom giant blasted the “legally deficient” premise of the case: “When people do bad things online, their internet service providers are not typically the ones to blame. This lawsuit claims otherwise.”
A Michigan inmate has won a $100 million default judgment against Sean “Diddy” Combs in a sexual assault lawsuit, an eye-popping figure handed down after the rapper did not show up in court or file any formal response to the case.
The huge judgment, confirmed by Billboard from court records, was issued by a Michigan state judge in Lenawee County to Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith – one of numerous people to accuse the embattled rapper of sexual abuse over the past year.
The ruling is a so-called default judgment, a kind of legal award granted when an accused party doesn’t respond to a legal action. At a hearing last month, a judge said that Combs had been properly served with the lawsuit, and court records indicate that he never answered the claims.
Trending on Billboard
In a statement to Billboard, Combs’ attorney Marc Agnifilo strongly denied that his client had ever been served with the lawsuit and said the rapper “looks forward to having this judgment swiftly dismissed.”
“This man is a convicted felon and sexual predator, who has been sentenced on 14 counts of sexual assault and kidnapping over the last 26 years,” Agnifilo said. “His resume now includes committing a fraud on the court from prison, as Mr. Combs has never heard of him let alone been served with any lawsuit.”
If lawyers for the rapper now respond to the lawsuit, they could seek to overturn the default judgment and proceed to normal litigation, where Cardello-Smith would need to prove his allegations to a jury before securing a judgment.
Once one of the most powerful men in the music industry, Diddy has been hit with at least seven civil lawsuits alleging sexual abuse over the past year, including claims by ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura that were later followed by a video showing him assaulting her. The hip-hop mogul is also facing an apparent federal criminal investigation after authorities raided his homes in March.
Though the rapper has denied the legal allegations against him, he issued an apology in May over his conduct captured on the video of the Ventura attack: “My behavior on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions in that video.”
According to Michigan inmate records, Cardello-Smith, 51, is serving multiple, decades-long sentences for a variety of crimes, including first-degree criminal sexual conduct and two counts of kidnapping. The earliest he can be released from prison is 2036.
Cardello-Smith sued Combs in June, claiming the rapper had spiked his drink and sexually assaulted him at a party in 1997. At a court hearing last month, he told a judge that the rapper had personally visited him in prison after he filed the lawsuit and offered him $2.3 million to drop his case.
At that same hearing, the inmate alleged that Combs had told him that he would not appear in court or respond to the lawsuit, saying “You know how we get down.” Cardello-Smith told the judge that he responded by telling Combs “I disagree with how you get down” and rejecting the settlement offer.
The lawsuit against Combs is not the first civil action Cardello-Smith has filed from behind bars. Last year, he sued a Detroit-area Catholic archdiocese, alleging he had been sexually abused by a priest and others between 1979 and 1993. The case was dismissed last month by state appeals court, which ruled that Cardello-Smith’s allegations were barred by the statute of limitations.
The White Stripes have filed a copyright lawsuit against Donald Trump for using “Seven Nation Army” in a social media post, making good on threats to sue the Republican presidential candidate.
In a complaint filed Monday in Manhattan federal court, 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.”
The lawsuit accuses Trump not only of infringing the band’s rights to the song, but also of violating federal trademark law by falsely suggesting the duo 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.
In a social media post announcing the lawsuit, White included a screenshot of the complaint with a one-line caption: “This machine sues fascists.”
The filing of the case came less than two weeks after White blasted Trump over the apparent use of his song. In the disputed clip, posted by the former president’s deputy director of communications, Trump ascends the stairs of a plane as the iconic bass riff of “Seven Nation Army” plays.
“Oh….Don’t even think about using my music you fascists,” White began. “Law suit coming from my lawyers about this (to add to your 5 thousand others.)”
Numerous artists have spoken out about in recent weeks about Trump’s use of their music. 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.
Most of the complaints have come as public statements or cease-and-desist letters, but others have taken legal action before the White Stripes. In August, the estate of Isaac Hayes sued in federal court, accusing the campaign of using his “Hold On, I’m Coming” at rallies and in video recordings of those events. Last week, the Hayes estate won an injunction barring the use of the song while the case plays out.
The use of copyrighted music at campaign rallies is a sometimes murky issue, with candidates often claiming that they secured a blanket license from ASCAP or BMI to perform the track. But the use of a song in a video is more straightforward; if a candidate hasn’t secured a sync license directly from the artist or their label, it is copyright infringement to use it.
In their lawsuit on Monday, the White Stripes said that Trump knew or should have known that he needed a license to play their song in his video — citing the fact that he has been “on the receiving end of numerous copyright claims by musical artists whose work he used without permission.”
The band also cited its previous opposition to his use of their music. Back in 2016, the White Stripes “publicly denounced” Trump for using their songs, saying that they were “disgusted by that association.”
A representative for the Trump campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.