Legal
Page: 49
Ice Spice is facing a copyright lawsuit over allegations that her recent hit “In Ha Mood” was copied from a Brooklyn rapper’s earlier track.
In a complaint filed Wednesday in Brooklyn federal court, the rapper D.Chamberz (Duval Chamberlain) says Ice Spice’s 2023 song is “strikingly similar” to his own “In That Mood” that he released in 2021.
“By every method of analysis, ‘In Ha Mood’ is a forgery,” D.Chamberz’s attorneys write in their complaint, obtained by Billboard. “Any proper comparative analysis of the beat, lyrics, hook, rhythmic structure, metrical placement, and narrative context will demonstrate that ‘In Ha Mood’ was copied.”
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In addition to naming Ice Spice (Isis Naija Gaston) as a defendant, the lawsuit also names her frequent producer, RiotUSA (Ephrem Lopez, Jr.), as well as Universal Music Group, Capitol Records and 10K Projects.
Released early last year following Ice Spice’s 2022 breakout, “In Ha Mood” reached No. 58 on the Hot 100 and No. 18 on the US Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs chart. It was later included on her debut EP Like..?, and she performed the song during her October appearance as the musical guest on Saturday Night Live.
But D.Chamberz says the song shares so many similarities with “In That Mood” that the overlap “cannot be purely coincidental.” He says the similar elements “go the core of each work,” and are so obvious that they’ve already been spotted by listeners.
“Non-expert listeners have independently pointed out that Defendants ‘stole’ ‘In That Mood’ in creating In Ha Mood,” the rapper’s lawyers write. “The two songs clearly employ numerous noticeably similar composition elements and lyrics, which result in a sound and feel that are very much alike.”
In any copyright lawsuit, an accuser like D.Chamberz must show that an alleged infringer had “access” to their work in order to copy it. That requirement might seem technical, but it’s often the fatal flaw in copyright cases filed by lesser-known acts, like one filed against Dua Lipa over “Levitating.”
In an effort to show “access,” Tuesday’s lawsuit notes that D.Chamberz shared “In That Mood” to his Instagram followers, and that the song got “significant airplay” on New York City radio stations, including Hot 97 and Power 105.1. It even cites one instance in which Riot allegedly posted an Instagram story of him listening to Hot 97 “less than two minutes” before the song was played on the air. And Chamberz’s lawyers also point out that Riot’s father is the well-known New York City radio personality DJ Enuff, who hosts a show on Hot 97 and allegedly “actively engaged with D.Chamberz’s social media content.”
“Based on all of the facts and circumstances known to plaintiffs, as described above, it is probable – or, at the very least, reasonably possible – that defendants heard the work and knew about the work prior to the creation and publication of ‘In Ha Mood,’” his lawyers write.
Read the full lawsuit filed against Ice Spice here:
Former Games of Thrones actress Sophie Turner dropped her “wrongful retention” lawsuit against ex-husband Joe Jonas over the custody of their two daughters after the former couple signed a co-parenting consent plan approved by a U.K. judge last week. According to The New York Times, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern […]
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: An ugly new legal battle erupts within the Prince estate; Madison Square Garden CEO James Dolan is sued for sexual assault; a judge issues a ruling on the ongoing battle between members of Mötley Crüe; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Civil War in The Prince Estate
After Prince died without a will in 2016, it took more than six years of legal wrangling to settle his estate, as heirs, advisors, a court-appointed bank and Primary Wave all battled before a Minnesota probate judge over how exactly the star’s assets should be divided.
When the dust finally settled in 2022 — with tax issues resolved and the $146 million estate split evenly into two LLCs — it seemed that the case was closed. Primary Wave (which bought out three of the heirs) would control one-half of the estate, while the remaining heirs and a pair of advisors would control the other half. Each side vowed to bring Prince’s music to a new generation of music fans.
But less than two years later, the Prince estate is suddenly back in court — this time, over allegations of an attempted coup within one of the ownership groups, of severe dysfunction at Paisley Park and of attempts by two heirs to unilaterally sell more shares to Primary Wave. For more, go read our full story here.
Other top stories this week…
JAMES DOLAN UNDER FIRE – The Madison Square Garden executive was hit with a sexual assault lawsuit claiming he pressured a masseuse into unwanted sex while his band was touring with the Eagles — and that he later facilitated an incident in which she was also assaulted by Harvey Weinstein. The lawsuit also named Irving Azoff’s The Azoff Company, claiming it had “benefited from facilitating Dolan’s behavior.”
CRÜE’S COURT CLASH – Mötley Crüe co-founder Mick Mars won a court order against his former bandmates, requiring them to repay some of his legal bills after a judge said they refused to turn over key financial records and other information. The decision was a win for Mars, but the real battle — a private arbitration case over whether the band acted illegally when they tried to kick him out of the band — remains ahead.
DIDDY BOOZE SETTLEMENT – Sean “Diddy” Combs and alcohol giant Diageo reached a settlement to resolve a year-long lawsuit over their soured partnership for DeLeón tequila. The deal, which will end a bitter legal battle that saw Combs accuse the liquor company of racism, came just months after he was hit with multiple sexual assault lawsuits.
G HERBO SENTENCED – A federal judge sentenced the Chicago rapper to three years of probation after he pleaded guilty to participating in a scam involving stolen credit card information — a fraud that prosecutors say netted the Chicago rapper almost $140,000 in private jet flights, vacation lodgings and luxury car rentals.
ALLEGED TUPAC KILLER GETS BAIL – A judge set bail at $750,000 for Duane “Keffe D” Davis, the former Los Angeles-area gang leader charged with orchestrating the killing of hip-hop legend Tupac Shakur in 1996. The judge ruled that Davis, who is allegedly in poor health after battling cancer, can serve house arrest with electronic monitoring ahead of his trial in June.
AI LEGISLATION IN WASHINGTON – A bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced a bill called No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act, or No AI FRAUD Act, legislation that would aim to regulate the use of artificial intelligence for cloning voices and other forms of likeness. The same day, lawmakers in Tennessee unveiled similar legislation called the Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act, or ELVIS Act, which would beef up existing state-level protections for such likeness rights.
Mötley Crüe co-founder Mick Mars has won a court order against his former bandmates, but the legal battle over his exit from the band is far from over.
In a decision Tuesday (Jan. 16), a Los Angeles judge ruled that the band should have handed over financial records, operating agreements and other key information earlier — and that Mars was therefore entitled to be repaid the legal bills he spent suing to win access to those files.
“The requests were not burdensome. Yet, Mars was compelled to file suit, and it appears plain that production would not have occurred without it. Mars is entitled to attorney fees,” Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant wrote in the ruling, which was obtained by Billboard.
Since the band ultimately ended up handing over those files in December, the judge ruled Tuesday that Mars’ court case is now legally moot. But he ruled that the band’s delay had been improper, meaning they owed Mars reimbursement: “These documents should have been produced without the need for prodding by Mars.” The total amount of legal fees will be decided in future proceedings.
The decision is a win for Mars, who claimed in court filings that Mötley Crüe was trying to make sure he “spends as much money as possible” so that he would be “starved out.” But it does not mean he has won his case against the band. The real battle, over whether his bandmates breached their contract by kicking him out, is going to take place in a private arbitration case that remains pending.
The civil war within Crüe first burst into the open in April, when Mars filed his lawsuit claiming he had been unceremoniously terminated by his “brothers of 41 years.” Though technically only seeking access to the band’s records, the lawsuit disclosed for the first time that the two sides were already locked in arbitration proceedings over his exit from the band.
In the complaint, Mars argued the band had moved to illegally deprive him of his 25% ownership stake in the group, a move he claimed came after he made the “tragic announcement” that he could no longer tour due to an arthritic condition called ankylosing spondylitis.
The band quickly responded, saying it “did not owe Mick anything” under existing band agreements and had done nothing wrong. They cited sworn declarations in which numerous touring staffers stated that Mars had repeatedly made serious errors on stage before he exited the band, including suddenly “playing a different song in a middle of another one” and “forgetting chords and songs.”
With that core dispute still unresolved and set to be decided by an arbitrator later this year, both sides portrayed Tuesday’s court ruling as a victory.
The band’s lawyer, Sasha Frid, pointed to the fact the judge declared Mars’ case moot: “The case is over. That’s the key takeaway. By denying the petition as moot and ending the case, the court found that the band turned over all the documents to Mars and there is nothing more to do. The band went above and beyond its obligations by providing much more documents than the statute required.”
Mars’ lawyer Ed McPherson, meanwhile, sharply rejected that interpretation: “If it makes the band feel better to say that they won, that is fine — but they apparently haven’t read the judge’s decision. When the judge says that they failed to produce documents ‘without justification,’ and he orders them to pay Mick’s attorneys’ fees, that does not feel like a win for the band to me!”
Madison Square Garden executive James Dolan is facing a sexual assault lawsuit that claims he pressured a masseuse into unwanted sex while his band was touring with the Eagles — and that he later facilitated an incident in which she was also assaulted by Harvey Weinstein.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday (Jan. 15) in Manhattan federal court, Kellye Croft says that Dolan coerced her into “unlawful and unwelcome sex acts” on repeated occasions after she was hired to serve as a massage therapist for the Eagles’ Glenn Frey during the 2013 tour.
Croft says she thought the job on the concert tour — on which Dolan’s band JD & The Straight Shot opened for the Eagles — was “her big break” and the “opportunity of a lifetime.” But she says she quickly realized the real reason she was there.
“Dolan was extremely assertive, and pressured Ms. Croft into unwanted sexual intercourse with him,” writes Croft’s attorney, Douglas Wigdor. “Ms. Croft was disgusted by Dolan, but her youth and extreme loneliness while on the road with strangers, as well as Dolan’s immense power, made it possible for Dolan to manipulate Ms. Croft and lure her under his control.”
Dolan is the majority owner/CEO of Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp., a live music giant that operates the famed New York City arena in addition to Manhattan’s Radio City Music Hall, the Las Vegas Sphere and other prominent venues.
Tuesday’s lawsuit also claims that Dolan later secretly orchestrated a 2014 encounter between Croft and his friend Weinstein, the disgraced film producer whose many sexual assault allegations helped spark the #MeToo movement in 2017. Weinstein is currently serving a decades-long prison sentence after being convicted on multiple felony charges.
Croft’s lawyers say Dolan arranged the early 2014 meetup, during which Weinstein allegedly invited her to his hotel room under the guise of discussing an opportunity for her to work as a massage therapist for actors on movie sets. After she refused his “escalating” behavior and returned to her room, her lawyers say Weinstein chased her down the hall, “barged into Ms. Croft’s hotel room” and proceeded to sexually assault her.
In a response sent to Billboard, Dolan’s attorney, E. Danya Perry, said there was “absolutely no merit to any of the allegations against Mr. Dolan” and that the references to Weinstein were “simply meant to inflame.” Perry alleges the claims were an “act of retaliation” by Wigdor, describing him as “an attorney who has brought multiple cases against Mr. Dolan and has not, and cannot, win a judgment against him.”
“Mr. Dolan always believed Ms. Croft to be a good person and is surprised she would agree to these claims,” Perry wrote. “Bottom line, this is not a he said/she said matter and there is compelling evidence to back up our position. We look forward to proving that in court.”
In his own statement, Wigdor said that “our firm has not lost multiple cases to Dolan — that is a fabrication.” He said that with the filing of the lawsuit, “it is time to finally hold Dolan accountable for his outrageous conduct.”
In addition to Dolan and Weinstein, the lawsuit also names several entities owned by The Azoff Company, the privately held company founded by legendary music industry executive Irving Azoff. Though Azoff himself is not individually named as a defendant, the lawsuit claims he was “extremely close friends” with Dolan as well as a frequent business partner — and that Azoff’s companies thus enabled Dolan’s alleged abuse.
“In addition to the extremely close personal relationship between Dolan and Irving Azoff, Dolan was a critically important business partner for the Azoff Entities,” Croft’s lawyers write. “The Azoff Entities thus benefited from facilitating Dolan’s behavior to the extent it kept their partner, a notoriously erratic billionaire, happy.”
In a statement to Billboard, a representative for Azoff strongly denied the lawsuit’s allegations: “Irving Azoff is not a party to this lawsuit. Neither he nor his companies had any involvement in any alleged misconduct by others.”
An attorney for Weinstein did not immediately return a request for comment.
Sean “Diddy” Combs and alcohol giant Diageo reached a settlement Tuesday to resolve a lawsuit over their soured tequila partnership, ending a bitter legal battle that saw the embattled hip-hop star and mogul accuse the company of racism.
Combs, who is now facing multiple sexual assault lawsuits, claimed in the lawsuit that Diageo had breached their agreement by failing to adequately support his DeLeón brand of tequila. In doing so, he accused Diageo of treating his product line “worse than others because he is Black.”
The detailed terms of Tuesday’s settlement were not disclosed, but Diageo and Combs said in a joint statement that the agreement would leave the two with “no ongoing business relationship,” removing Combs from any further involvement in not just DeLeón but also the company’s popular Cîroc vodka.
“Sean Combs and Diageo have now agreed to resolve all disputes between them,” the two sides said in a joint statement. “Mr. Combs has withdrawn all of his allegations about Diageo and will voluntarily dismiss his lawsuits against Diageo with prejudice.”
The abrupt settlement with Diageo came as Combs is facing multiple accusations of sexual assault. After he quickly settled a rape lawsuit filed in November by longtime romantic partner Cassie, he was then quickly sued again by three different times by three different women over similar allegations. Diddy has strongly denied all such accusations and vowed to clear his name in court.
Before any of those allegations came to light, Combs sued Diageo in May, claiming the company breached his partnership deal for DeLeón. But he also went a lot further than that, claiming Diageo had “typecast” the tequila as a “Black brand” that could only be sold to “urban” consumers, harming its sales and leaving it lagging behind competing Diageo brands like Casamigos and Don Julio.
“Cloaking itself in the language of diversity and equality is good for Diageo’s business, but it is a lie,” Combs’ lawyers wrote. “While Diageo may conspicuously include images of its Black partners in advertising materials and press releases, its words only provide the illusion of inclusion.”
Diageo responded a month later, calling the lawsuit a “bad faith, sham action” filed by a star who had “amassed nearly one billion dollars” from their partnership but now wanted to “extract” billions more.
“These allegations are nothing more than opportunistic attempts to garner press attention and distract the court from the fact that plaintiff’s breach-of-contract claim is entirely without merit,” the company’s attorneys wrote. “Diageo categorically denies these accusations.”
Diageo demanded that the case be sent to private arbitration, citing a provision in Diddy’s partnership contract that they said required such disputes be handled out of court. The company argued that, if Diddy’s “inflammatory rhetoric” about racism was removed, the case was nothing more than a “garden variety” business dispute that must be arbitrated. But in September, the judge overseeing the case rejected that argument, meaning the case would have moved forward in state court, with the trial open to the public.
Members of a group of men who say they were sexually abused as boys by a Japanese entertainment mogul are accusing the company behind the scandal, previously known as Johnny’s, of not being sincere in dealing with the victims.
Shimon Ishimaru, who represents the victims’ group, said many have not yet received compensation. The group has asked to meet with company officials, but that has not happened, he said at a news conference with three other men who said they were victims.
Ishimaru is among hundreds of men who have come forward since last year, alleging they were sexually abused as teens by boy band producer Johnny Kitagawa. Kitagawa, who died in 2019, was never charged and remained powerful in the entertainment industry.
The company finally acknowledged Kitagawa’s long-rumored abuse last year. The company’s chief made a public apology in May. The Japanese government has also pushed for compensation.
The company, which has changed its name from Johnny & Associates to Smile-Up, said Monday (Jan. 15) it has received requests for compensation from 939 people. Of those, 125 have received compensation, it said in a statement. The company has set up a panel of three former judges to look into the claims.
“We are proceeding with those with whom we have reached an agreement on payments,” it said, while promising to continue with its efforts.
It did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday’s news conference.
The victims’ group said it has been approached by dozens of people who had been told by the company that there was not enough evidence to honor their claims. Details were not disclosed.
The company’s production business, known previously as Johnny’s, has continued under a different name, Starto Entertainment.
According to multiple accounts, Kitagawa abused the boys in his Tokyo luxury mansion, as well as other places, such as his car and overseas hotels, while they were performing as Johnny’s dancers and singers. The abuse continued for several decades.
The repercussions of the scandal have spread. In standup comedy, several women have alleged sexual abuse by a famous comic. He has denied the allegations.
The U.N. Working Group on Business and Human Rights, which is investigating the Johnny’s abuse cases, is to issue a report in June, including recommendations for change.
The Associated Press does not usually identify people who say they were sexually assaulted, but Kitagawa’s recent accusers have given their names. Critics say what happened and the silence of Japan’s mainstream media are indicative of how the world’s third largest economy lags in protecting human rights.
Leon Wildes, a prominent immigration lawyer best known for his landmark, yearslong fight in the 1970s to prevent John Lennon from being deported and enable the former Beatle to receive permanent residency in the U.S., has died at age 90.
Wildes died Monday (Jan. 8) at Lenox Hill Hospital in Manhattan. His son — immigration attorney and Englewood, New Jersey Mayor Michael Wildes — said that he had been in failing health after a series of strokes.
“Dad felt he effectively lived the American Dream for a kid from Olyphant PA and spent his life facilitating the same experience for scores more,” said Michael Wildes, who is also the managing partner for the firm his father helped start, Wildes & Weinberg. “He was beloved by his family, was extraordinarily humble, and beloved by our Bar.”
Leon Wildes was a graduate of the New York University School of Law who co-founded Wildes & Weinberg in 1960 and, by the end of the decade, had gained enough stature to serve as president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. His name would become part of musical and political history after an old law school classmate, Alan Kahn, called in 1972 and told him that Lennon and Yoko Ono needed his help getting their visas extended.
Wildes agreed to meet with the couple at the Manhattan offices of Apple Records, the label founded by the Beatles in the late 1960s. But he did have one embarrassing confession about Lennon and his artist wife.
“I have no idea who these people are,” he told Kahn, later saying he misheard their names as “Jack Lemmon and Yoko Moto.”
What Wildes initially thought would be a formality turned into one of the most dramatic legal struggles of the era. Lennon and Ono had moved from England to New York City, trying to track down Ono’s daughter from a previous marriage, Kyoko Chan Cox, whom her ex-husband had abducted.
John and Yoko also were active in the New Left politics of the time, opposing the Vietnam War and backing efforts to defeat President Richard Nixon in his bid for re-election. With the minimum voting age lowered from 21 to 18, Lennon’s plans included a 1972 tour of the U.S. that would potentially attract millions of young people.
As government files later revealed, some Nixon supporters feared that Lennon could damage Nixon politically. In a February 1972 memo sent to Sen. Strom Thurmond, a South Carolina Republican and a member of a Senate subcommittee on internal security, aides recommended a “strategic countermeasure,” terminating Lennon’s visa. (The government would also try to deport Ono, a Tokyo native, but she was granted permanent residency in 1973).
Thurmond forwarded the memo to Nixon’s attorney general, John Mitchell, whose deputy, Richard Kleindienst, contacted the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In March, the INS informed the British rock star that his visa would not be extended. Officials cited a drug bust in London in 1968, when Lennon pleaded guilty to possession of “cannabis resin.” Under U.S. law at the time, non-residents faced deportation if “convicted of any law or regulation relating to the illicit possession” of narcotic drugs or marijuana.
Over the next two years, Lennon and Ono endured ongoing government harassment, with FBI director J. Edgar Hoover at times personally involved. Their phone was tapped and their whereabouts closely followed. Lennon would say the pressure helped lead to the temporary breakup of his marriage. The musician left for Los Angeles in 1973 and embarked on what he called his “long weekend” of drinking and drugs, ending with the couple reconciling in 1975.
Meanwhile, musicians and writers and other public figures urged the government to let him stay. Letters of support were signed by everyone from Fred Astaire and Dick Cavett to Saul Bellow and Stevie Wonder. Bob Dylan composed a hand-written note praising John and Yoko as enemies of “this mild dull taste of commercialism” forced on the culture by the “overpowering mass media.”
The Lennons didn’t always help their case. When the couple held their first press conference to discuss the deportation order, the two pulled tissues out of their pockets and declared the birth of a new country, “Nutopia,” a paradise with “no land, no boundaries, no passports, only people.” As representatives of Nutopia, John and Yoko granted themselves diplomatic immunity.
Yoko later apologized, Wildes would recall.
“Leon, you have to understand. We are artists. We have a message,” she told him.
Thanks to Wildes’ ingenuity and the shocking twists of politics in the 1970s, Lennon’s deportation was delayed and ultimately revoked. Wildes found a loophole in the immigration drug law after Lennon told his lawyer that he had been found guilty of possessing hashish, not marijuana (“Hash is much better than marijuana!” Lennon joked). Wildes also highlighted an obscure, unacknowledged government policy of “prosecutorial discretion,” under which officials used varying standards in deciding immigrant cases to pursue.
Meanwhile, the FBI’s targeting of Lennon ended after Nixon’s re-election in 1972, and the INS campaign to deport him began to lose momentum after the growing Watergate scandal led Nixon to resign in August 1974. By October 1975, Mitchell was among many former Nixon officials serving jail time, and Lennon was celebrating an extraordinary week of milestones. On Oct. 7, a federal appeals court judge in New York reversed the deportation order, citing the government’s “secret political grounds.” Two days later, on Lennon’s 35th birthday, Ono gave birth to their son, Sean.
For a final hearing, in July 1976, Wildes brought in Norman Mailer and Gloria Swanson, among others, to testify on Lennon’s behalf, and the INS granted the musician his green card.
“It’s great to be legal again,” Lennon said after the hearing.
The legacy of Lennon’s struggles would endure for decades. When President Barack Obama launched his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA), for which some children of immigrants were granted temporary relief from deportation, he drew upon reasoning similar to what Wildes had revealed on behalf of Lennon: prosecutorial discretion.
Rock stars, too, were affected. Mick Jagger, who also had been arrested in England on drug charges, was among those who found it easier to travel to the U.S.
“I have in my passport a notation stating that the ineligibility of my visa is withdrawn ‘because of the Lennon precedent’,” Jagger said in a 2005 book, Memories of John Lennon, published upon the 25th anniversary’s of Lennon’s murder. “So I have him in my memory every time I enter this country.”
Wildes continued to practice law after his time with Lennon and was an adjunct professor for more than 30 years at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. His honors included the Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for excellence in advancing the practice of immigration law and the Elmer Fried Excellence in Teaching Award.
Wildes was married three times, most recently to Alice Goldberg Wildes, and is survived by two children, eight grandchildren and five great-grandchildren.
Descended from European Jews, Wildes grew up in a small Pennsylvania community where he was often the only Jew in his class. He attended Yeshiva College as an undergraduate and became interested in immigration law after working with the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society in the late 1950s. Wildes published articles in the Cardozo Law Review among other journals and wrote a book on the Lennon case, John Lennon Vs. the USA, that came out in 2016.
An opera fan when he was young, he would become fully vested in the Beatles universe, to the point of using “Imagine” as music when a caller to his office was placed on hold. He remained close to Yoko, appeared in the 2006 documentary The U.S. vs. John Lennon and even attended some Beatles conventions, among them the Chicago-based Fest for Beatles Fans.
“I spoke there three times, and every time after I spoke, dozens of people came up, shook my hand and thanked me for what I had done for John Lennon,” he told Pennyblackmusic.co.uk in 2017. “And I learned from these wonderful people that it is really something to marvel about and to enjoy this beautiful music of the Beatles. I learned a lot about that kind of music, and now I favor it as well.”
G Herbo has been sentenced to three years of probation after pleading guilty to participating in a scam involving stolen credit card information – a fraud that prosecutors say netted the Chicago rapper almost $140,000 in private jet flights, vacation lodgings and luxury car rentals.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Herbo, who’s had three top-10 albums on the Billboard 200 over the past four years, was sentenced by a Massachusetts federal judge Thursday after taking a plea deal last summer, which saw him plead guilty to one count of wire fraud conspiracy and one count of false statements to a federal official.
Prosecutors say Herbo (Herbert Wright) and others victimized real people and businesses by using stolen credit card info to fund an “extravagant lifestyle” that he flaunted on social media. That included $14,500 for a villa rental in Jamaica, and another $34,000 on renting cars like a Mercedes Benz 5560.
“He gave the impression that his use of private jets, luxury cars and tropical villas were the legitimate fruits of his booming rap career,” U.S. Attorney Joshua S. Levy said in a statement. “However, his lavish lifestyle was shamelessly built on deceit and fraud using stolen account information that inflicted substantial harm on numerous businesses, leaving a wake of victims burdened with financial losses.”
Thursday’s sentence was lighter than the one sought by prosecutors, who had asked the judge to send Herbo to federal prison for one year on top of three years of probation. In addition to probation, the rapper was also ordered to pay restitution and forfeiture of $139,968 for each count, as well as a $5,500 fine.
Herbo and five others were indicted in December 2020, charged with using real credit card info – including actual names, security codes and other private data – to successfully rack up charges. Prosecutors say businesses typically allowed the charges, leading to cardholders disputing them and credit card companies ultimately foisting the losses back on businesses.
The scam, operated from March 2017 through November 2018, was allegedly facilitated by an associate named Antonio Strong, whom Herbo would ask to procure vehicles (“whips”), or accommodation (“cribs”), in addition to other goods and services. One major charge was private jet travel; prosecutors say Herbo eventually used stolen cards to pay for four charters that totaled more than $80,000.
Herbo wasn’t the first hip hop star to face charges over credit card scamming. In 2013, Los Angeles rapper Guerilla Black was sentenced to more than nine years in prison over a fraud involving more than 27,000 stolen credit card numbers. And in 2019, federal prosecutors brought similar charges against Selfmade Kash, a Detroit rapper who had bragged in songs about being the “GOAT swiper”; he later pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years of probation.
In Herbo’s case, prosecutors did not allege that that the rapper himself purchased stolen card information, but they said he knew that Strong was doing so and repeatedly sought him out for that purpose.
“Wright provided Strong with money, Wright received flights, vehicles, and accommodations from Strong using Illicit Account Information, and Wright and Strong communicated frequently concerning their illicit transactions,” prosecutors wrote in one legal filing.
In one example, prosecutors said that Strong had texted Herbo to remind him “Don’t forget DARREN IS MY NAME” when using the stolen information to book luxury vehicle rentals. Herbo then responded via text: “I gotchu bro.”
Initially, Herbo had also been facing two counts of aggravated identity theft, more serious charges that each would have carried a minimum two-year prison sentence if he had been convicted. But those charges were dropped under last summer’s plea deal.
A rep for the rapper did not immediately return a request for comment from Billboard.
A year after the legal battle over Prince’s estate was finally settled, the music legend’s heirs are now suddenly back in court again, battling amongst each other over allegations that certain family members are trying to wrongfully seize control.
The lawsuit, made public Wednesday (Jan. 10) in Delaware court, amounts to a civil war among the members of Prince Legacy LLC, one of the two holding companies created to run the star’s $156 million estate. (Primary Wave, which owns the other half of the estate, is not involved in the dispute.)
The case was filed by L. Londell McMillan and Charles Spicer, two longtime Prince friends who serve as managers for Prince Legacy, over allegations that four of Prince’s family members have been improperly trying to force them out of the company. They say such a move not only violates the group’s operating agreement but would cause massive damage to efforts “to preserve and protect Prince’s legacy.”
“The Individual defendants lack any business and management experience, have no experience in the music and entertainment industries, and have no experience negotiating and managing high-level deals in the entertainment industry,” McMillan and Spicer wrote in the complaint, obtained by Billboard. “They have a documented history of infighting. Based on the amount and complexity of the work that Prince Legacy is involved with, they are simply not capable of stepping in and managing its business.”
The lawsuit targets Prince’s half-sisters Sharon Nelson and Norrine Nelson, as well as his niece Breanna Nelson and his nephew Allen Nelson. None of the defendants could immediately be located for comment, and attorneys who have previously represented them did not return requests for comment.
If Sharon and Norrine “install themselves” and oust McMillan and Spicer, the lawsuit claims that “their interference and intervention will make it impossible to carry on the business of Prince Legacy and will cause irreparable harm to the Company’s good will, existing relationships, and revenue streams.”
Prince died of a fentanyl overdose in April 2016 at the age of 57. Though legendary for his tight control over his intellectual property rights, the iconic artist died without a will, sparking a complex process known as probate in which courts decide how to disperse a deceased person’s estate. Six of Prince’s half-siblings were named as heirs, three of whom later sold their shares to Primary Wave.
The court case finally wrapped up in August 2022 when the estate was formally divided evenly between Prince Legacy (owned by McMillan, Spicer and the remaining heirs) and a similar company called Prince Oat Holdings LLC, which is owned entirely by Primary Wave. At the time, both sides vowed to work together to bring Prince’s music and legacy to a new generation of music fans.
But according to Wednesday’s lawsuit, tensions quickly rose at Prince Legacy behind closed doors. McMillan and Spicer, installed as managing members of the company, claim that Sharon became “disgruntled” because they refused to comply with her “unreasonable demands” about the operations of the estate, and was “offended” her actions were subject to approval from the rest of the company.
“For example, Sharon sought (unsuccessfully) to replace the entire staff of Paisley Park with individuals of her choosing and take charge of Paisley Park,” the lawsuit claims, referring to Prince’s famed Minnesota mansion. “Her demands for lavish events held at Paisley Park at the expense of Paisley Park were likewise rejected.”
Breanna, meanwhile, allegedly became displeased when similar efforts were rejected. Among other demands, the lawsuit claims she to tried to “appoint her son as an intern of Paisley Park in the marketing department” and make other key hires without consulting the company.
Rather than raise their grievances in an appropriate manner, McMillan and Spicer claim that Sharon and Breanna instead “harassed and disparaged” the two managers while demanding that they resign. They say Sharon threatened to publish “false allegations” and sue them unless they would step down.
Perhaps most notably, the lawsuit claims that both women then attempted to unilaterally sell their shares in the holding company to Primary Wave — a contentious subject that evokes the years of messy litigation and dealing that it took to finally resolve the estate case in the current 50-50 structure.
In the lawsuit, McMillan and Spicer say such a sale could not be made without unanimous consent of the members of Prince Legacy. Faced with that limitation, the lawsuit claims that the heirs have been trying to change the company’s bylaws — both to remove McMillan and Spicer as managers and to lower the threshold required to let a member sell their shares to a third party.
The lawsuit is seeking an immediate injunction, blocking any such changes from taking place on the grounds that it would leave the company “irreparably harmed” if allowed to proceed.
“The Individual Defendants’ conduct threatens the myriad business undertakings of Prince Legacy, currently being managed by McMillan and Spicer and threatens the Company’s relationship with third parties and its leverage in negotiating those deals,” the lawsuit says.