Legal
Page: 82
Zach Bryan was arrested Thursday evening (Sept. 7) in Oklahoma for obstruction of investigation, according to the Craig County Sheriff’s Office. There are currently no other details on the country/rock star’s arrest, which was first reported by TMZ. Bryan was born in Oologah, Oklahoma, and lives in nearby Tulsa, while the sheriff’s office where he […]
Kanye West filed a lawsuit in California on Wednesday (Sept. 6) against the individual or entities responsible for taking and distributing copies of his music that have ended up on social media.
In the complaint, the artist, who now goes by Ye, alleges trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract due to the unauthorized leaks of copyrighted works on both Instagram and X (formerly Twitter), arguing they have caused “substantial harm” to his reputation.
Ye’s lawyers claim that starting on Mar. 3, 2023, the owner of the @daunreleasedgod_ handle on Instagram went on a leaking spree of unreleased tracks, including “We Did it Kid,” “Shy Can’t Look,” “NASDAQ” and “Mr. Miyagi,” as well as collaborations with artists including DJ Khaled and unauthorized video footage of a Donda listening party.
The rapper’s complaint goes on to cite the @daunreleasedgod_ account on X for similarly posting unauthorized leaks on dates ranging from mid-June to late August. “Ye has suffered significant financial losses and damages as a direct result of the Defendants’ actions,” the suit alleges.
The lawsuit does not name @daunreleasedgod_ or any of its other variations as a defendant in the case, only that it was the main distribution vehicle for the leaks.
Ye’s lawsuit indicates that he “does not know the true names or capacities” of the defendants who leaked the tracks to the Instagram or X user(s), but believes that those individuals were required to sign confidentiality agreements with him before they were given access to the compositions. By leaking and distributing the tracks, the defendants breached their contract with the artist and owe him damages and any profits generated, the complaint adds.
The filing continues that the “distinctive arrangement and unique elements” found in Ye’s music amount to a trade secret “due to its economic value, secrecy, and the efforts taken to safeguard it” and that the defendants violated their contract with Ye when they “knowingly and unlawfully acquired, disclosed, and distributed” those unique works.
The case, filed by Gregory K. Nelson of Weeks Nelson, seeks to restrain the defendants and “those acting in concert with them or at their direction” from further exploitation of Ye’s compositions and demands damages, fees and other costs. While the identities of the defendants are not yet public, “Ye will amend its Complaint to set forth the true names and capacities of these defendants when they have been ascertained.”
The head of a powerful Japanese talent agency resigned Thursday (Sept. 7) and made an apology punctuated by repeated, lengthy bows, nine days after an internal investigation concluded that its founder had sexually abused hundreds of young performers over decades.
Julie Keiko Fujishima announced she was stepping down as president of Johnny & Associates, the agency founded by her late uncle Johnny Kitagawa, and promised to contribute to a compensation fund from her own fortune.
“This is what my uncle committed, and as a niece, I want to take responsibility,” Fujishima said solemnly. Fujishima said the alleged sex abuse had really happened and that she would stay on the company’s board to see through a victim compensation program.
A group of men who accused Kitagawa of raping them as children said they were pleased the company apologized, but some had reservations.
“The wounds in my heart will not heal,” Yukihiro Oshima told reporters. “But I feel a little better.”
Fujishima remains the sole owner of Johnny’s, and her replacement faces his own allegations of mistreating young performers.
Rumors that Kitagawa had abused children followed his career for decades, but his power allowed him to silence almost all allegations until his death in 2019. The company agreed to investigate earlier this year, after the BBC aired a documentary that spoke with several accusers and others began to come forward by name.
The three-month probe concluded that Johnny Kitagawa sexually assaulted and abused boys as far back as the 1950s and targeted at least several hundred people.
The company named a 56-year-old performer as its new leader. Noriyuki Higashiyama said he was retiring as an actor and singer to take the job, a role that will include overseeing compensation for men who were assaulted as children.
“A horrendous crime has been committed,” Higashiyama told reporters at a Tokyo hotel, bowing deeply with Fujishima.
“It will take time to win back trust, and I am putting my life on the line for this effort.”
Higashiyama immediately fielded questions about allegations that he had engaged in bullying or sexually abusing other Johnny’s boys.
“I don’t remember clearly; maybe it happened, maybe it didn’t,” he said.
He acknowledged he tended to be strict with younger performers, and that he may have done things as a teen or in his 20s that he would not do now. A new company structure, which will include an outside compliance officer, will be announced next month, Fujishima said.
At one point, she choked down tears, stressing the achievements of the company’s singers and dancers. “I only feel deep gratitude to all the fans,” she said. Kitagawa had been so powerful that she, and many others, had kept silent, she added.
The men who have come forward say Kitagawa raped, fondled and abused them while they were working for his company as dancers and singers.
Many of the victims were members of a backup group called Johnny’s Jr., who danced and sang behind bigger stars. One man who came forward recently said he was routinely molested when Kitagawa had yet to found his company. He was just 8 years old.
Higashiyama denied he was a victim. He said Kitagawa had been like a father to him, while denouncing his acts as “the most pathetic in the history of humankind.” When he found out what Kitagawa had done, he felt as though he had lost everything, Higashiyama recalled.
“Whether I am qualified to take on this job, you be the judge,” he said.
Separately, Guinness World Records said it had stripped Kitagawa of all the records he had held, such as No. 1 hits, according to its policy toward “criminals.”
B.G., a founding member of the popular ’90s rap group Hot Boys, was released from prison Tuesday (Sept. 6) after serving 12 years for gun possession and witness tampering, a Cash Money rep confirmed to Billboard. Cash Money founder Birdman was on Instagram Live when he greeted his New Orleans comrade with a big hug, welcoming […]
A group of men who say they were sexually abused by a Japanese boy band producer expressed hope Monday (Sept. 4) that the company will provide financial compensation and introduce measures to prevent a recurrence.
They say producer Johnny Kitagawa sexually preyed on young dancers and singers for decades, having them stay at his luxury home, handing them cash and leveraging promises of potential fame. The company, Johnny & Associates, is a powerful force in Japan’s entertainment industry.
The men said at a news conference Monday that they have been ignored for decades by the company, Japanese society and mainstream media.
Company Chief Executive Julie Keiko Fujishima released a brief statement on YouTube in May about the accusations but has not appeared before reporters. The company has set a news conference for Thursday.
“We want Julie to apologize, as the chief executive and company owner,” said Shimon Ishimaru, one of nine men who have formed a group demanding an apology and compensation from the company. “For a company behind this big a crime to do nothing is unimaginable.”
Johnny’s, as the company is known, is family-run and not publicly listed. Kitagawa, Fujishima’s uncle, died in 2019 and was never charged.
A special team set up by the Tokyo-based company recently spoke to 23 accusers, but has said the total will likely balloon to at least several hundred people. The team also recommended Fujishima resign.
Junya Hiramoto, another member of Ishimaru’s group, said they hope to set an example for others who have suffered.
“Our wounds never fade,” Hiramoto said. “Do you think we aren’t still hurting? Do you think we can forget? Do you know what it’s like for us to come forward like this, filled with shame?”
Over the years, persistent allegations against Kitagawa have generally been dismissed as malicious rumors. Mainstream media stayed silent.
The U.N. Working Group on Business and Human Rights has urged the Japanese government to act to make sure that Johnny’s provides an apology and compensation and that government oversight of businesses be improved. The government has yet to take action.
Japan tends to be behind the West on issues of gender equality, children’s rights and awareness about sexuality.
It was only after a BBC documentary about Kitagawa aired this year that the scandal again became a topic of scrutiny.
Another accuser, Kauan Okamoto, spoke at the Foreign Correspondents Club in April, saying he trusted foreign media more than Japanese media. Okamoto, like many others who have come forward, was part of a backup boys’ group called Johnny’s Jr.
The Associated Press does not usually identify people who say they were sexually assaulted, but Kitagawa’s recent accusers decided to be named publicly in news accounts.
Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion have won a court ruling tossing out a lawsuit that accused them of stealing the lyrics to their smash hits “WAP” and “Thot Shit” from an earlier track called “Grab Em by the P—-.”
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In a decision issued Tuesday (Aug. 29), a Manhattan federal judge ruled that the lyrics Cardi and Megan were accused of copying in their songs — “p—- so wet” and “n—-s wild’n” — were simply too unoriginal to be covered by copyright law.
“The lyrics over which plaintiff asserts copyright protection are no more than common phrases, employed frequently in popular culture and other Hip-Hop songs,” U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter wrote.
“The concept of using ‘p—- so wet’ as a rhetorical device in a song is neither original nor unique to plaintiff,” the judge wrote. “Likewise, defendants have provided examples of at least three songs pre-dating [‘Grab Em’] which use some variation of the phrase ‘n—–s wild’n.’”
The ruling dismissed a lawsuit filed last year by Denise Jones, a rapper who performs under the name Necey X, against Cardi (Belcalis Marlenis Almanzar), Megan (Megan Pete) and Atlantic Records. Jones, who sued without the aid of a lawyer, claimed that the stars chose to “copy and paste” her lyrics into their songs.
But in Tuesday’s decision, Judge Carter said Jones not only lacked valid copyrights in those lyrics but that Cardi and Megan’s own words were not “substantially similar” to those in “Grab Em” — the key requirement for proving copyright infringement.
“Defendants’ lyric, ‘why you in the club with n—-s wild’n,’ poses a question to the rapper (or to the audience), while plaintiff’s lyric refers to the rapper’s effect on a single individual,” the judge wrote. “Thus, the phrase is used in different ways and has different meanings such that an ordinary listener would not identify defendants’ lyric as being appropriated from plaintiff’s song.”
The lawsuit also included additional claims beyond copyright law, including that Cardi and Megan had stalked and harassed Jones. But Judge Carter quickly dispatched those allegations as well.
“Plaintiff makes generalized allegations about fearing for her safety from alleged stalking and harassment by the ‘cartel’ that she equates to the music industry at large, but plaintiff neither identifies any negligent conduct on the part of defendants or any special duty to avoid causing emotional distress,” the judge wrote.
Jones did not return a request for comment on the ruling Friday.
Released in August 2020 by Cardi with guest vocals by Megan, “WAP” was a smash hit, spending four weeks atop the Hot 100. “Thot Shit,” released a year later by Megan, was partly inspired by the backlash that “WAP” had received from conservative critics; it reached No. 16 on the Hot 100.
Whether by coincidence, osmosis, common ancestry or, you know, theft, there are plenty of hit songs that sound strangely similar to pre-existing material… or do they? Enter the lawsuit. While some artists and songwriters shrug off similarities, others take it to court, demanding what they perceive is their due when it comes to alleged copyright infringement.
Of course, music history – especially when it comes to pre-recorded music – is rife with songs that were inspired by (or wholesale stolen from) previous material. Early rock n’ roll songs frequently lifted riffs, lyrics and chords from classic blues and country songs, which themselves were often based on folk tunes, African-American spirituals and work songs, nursery rhymes and even melodies from classical compositions. If you could time travel and track the authorship of songs as simple as “I’ve Been Working on the Railroad” or “Yankee Doodle,” the list of co-writers for each would probably run north of two dozen by modern standards of crediting songwriters for their contributions.
As recorded music became big business over the 20th century (and new technology made it easier to track song authorship and a writer’s exposure to previous material), copyright lawsuits became a regular occurrence in the music industry. But the litigation really took off in the 2010s, after a landmark lawsuit between the estate of Marvin Gaye and Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams over “Blurred Lines” made things a bit more muddled (or blurred, if you will).
In the aftermath of the “Blurred Lines” case, many songwriters opted to credit scribes whose copyrighted material bore even a passing resemblance to theirs, assuming it was easier to give credit than deal with a protracted, expensive lawsuit. But more recently, many artists have started to fight back, fearing that settling with accusers was leading to more unjustified lawsuits. Led Zeppelin, Katy Perry and Ed Sheeran have all won high-profile victories in recent years, defeating copyright cases by arguing that basic musical building blocks must be free for everyone to use.
It’s worth mentioning that technically, plagiarism (taking someone else’s efforts and presenting it as your own original work) is not illegal in the United States. If a dispute over a song reaches the courts, it’s over copyright infringement, not plagiarism, so the arguments over these songs are about whether someone ran afoul of copyright law. (Although most people tsk-tsk plagiarists, too.)
The songs on this list share two things in common: They topped the Billboard Hot 100, and some people believe they lifted elements from a previously existing song. Inclusion on this list doesn’t imply wrongdoing. Several of these disagreements settled out of court; one was settled without any lawsuit being filed; and one artist handily won their case against the accuser.
Read on to see how the rest of the songs fared.
“Come Together”
A federal judge in Texas ruled Thursday that the state’s new law restricting drag performances was likely unconstitutional, issuing a temporary restraining order blocking the statute from going into effect on Friday.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Following similar rulings by federal courts on such laws in Tennessee and Florida, U.S. District Judge David Hittner ruled that Texas’ statute, called Senate Bill 12, likely violated the First Amendment by restricting free speech.
“The Court finds there is a substantial likelihood that S.B. 12 as drafted violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution under one or more of the legal theories put forward by the plaintiffs,” the judge wrote.
The ruling went in favor of a group of drag performers, drag production companies and non-profits that challenged the law. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, they argued that that S.B. 12 “criminalizes and restricts an enormous swath of constitutionally protected activity.”
Thursday’s order came as a temporary restraining order, which will only be in effect until the judge can issue a full written ruling. But the wording of the order indicates that he will likely strike down the law whenever he issues the more detailed decision.
Such a TRO, which can only be issued if a plaintiff proves they will suffer “irreparable harm” without one, was necessary because the law was set to go into effect on Friday.
“The court considers the impending infringement on the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights sufficient irreparable harm to warrant enjoining S.B. 12 while a final judgment is drafted,” Judge Hittner wrote.
Following the ruling, Paige Willey, spokeswoman for the Attorney General of Texas, told Billboard: “The people of Texas were appalled to learn of an increasing trend of obscene, sexually explicit so-called “drag” performances being marketed to families with children. The Office of the Attorney General will pursue all legal remedies possible to aggressively defend SB 12, the state law that regulates such performances to protect children and uphold public decency.”
A spokesperson for the ACLU did not immediately return a request for comment.
Passed by Texas lawmakers in May and signed by Gov. Greg Abbott in June, S.B. 12 expands criminal restrictions on public performance of sexual conduct. The original bill included explicit references to drag shows, but they were removed in response to criticism. Instead, the final version bans sexual gestures that use “accessories or prosthetics that exaggerate male or female sexual characteristics.” Violators can face up to a year in jail, and businesses hosting events can be fined $10,000 for each violation.
Critics say such statutes, proposed or passed in states across the country over the past two years, are a thinly-veiled attack on the LGBTQ community. The new laws have been closely-watched by the music industry, over concerns that aspects of concerts could run afoul of broad new restrictions.
The ACLU filed its lawsuit earlier this month, arguing that – despite the changes to the wording – the new statute “unconstitutionally singles out drag.” They said it was also “sweepingly overbroad and vague and fails to give adequate notice of what it proscribes.”
“In its zeal to target drag, the Legislature also passed a bill so yawning in scope that it criminalizes and restricts an enormous swath of constitutionally protected activity, including theater, ballet, comedy, and even cheerleading,” the group wrote.
The suit was filed on behalf of nonprofit LGBTQIA+ organizations The Woodlands Pride and Abilene Pride Alliance; drag entertainment companies Extragrams, LLC and 360 Queen Entertainment LLC; and drag performer Brigitte Bandit.
Earlier this week, Judge Hittner held a two-day trial-like hearing on the arguments from both sides. A final ruling is expected early next week.
After Kenosha police officers mistakenly believed Jermelle English Jr. was involved in a hit-and-run incident and arrested him at a Kenosha, Wisc., Applebees in July, Jay-Z’s Team ROC — Roc Nation’s philanthropic and social justice arm — has hired attorney Alex Spiro to get all charges dropped in the upcoming case.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
According to ABC WISN 12, cell phone footage caught Kenosha police officers approached English inside the restaurant and accused him of being a suspect in the car crash. Despite vehemently denying his involvement, authorities pinned him down to the ground while he held his 1-year-old child. Witnesses told police the suspects involved in the hit-and-run included two Black men and a woman carrying a child heading toward a local Applebee’s. Officers believed English was the culprit and aimed to pull the baby out of his hands while attacking him on the ground. According to the Associated Press, the video appears to show one of the officers punching English.
Though police later learned English and his family were not involved, Kenosha police charged him with disorderly conduct, resisting and obstructing an officer. The woman who was with him received the exact same charges, along with possession of marijuana. The actual culprits were later found and apprehended in the restaurant’s bathroom.
According to ABC and NBC News, the Kenosha police have launched an internal investigation into the incident. Billboard has reached out to the Kenosha Police Department for comment.
“The reckless arrest of Jermelle English Jr. and the careless endangerment of his infant child by the Kenosha Police Department is an absolute travesty,”Dania Diaz, Team ROC’s managing director, said in a release. “The Team ROC team is here to support Jermelle and his family through this traumatic experience, demand justice and hold the Kenosha police officers accountable.”
Along with working on getting the charges dropped, Spiro will also work to “evaluate civil suits against those responsible,” according to the announcement from Team ROC.
This isn’t the first time Team Roc has aided the community of Milwaukee. In 2020, it helped coordinate a rally for Alvin Cole in Wauwatosa, who was killed by a police officer earlier. Team ROC paid legal fees for the peaceful demonstrators arrested and fined for their involvement.
Karol G and Tiësto are facing a copyright infringement lawsuit over their song “Don’t Be Shy,” filed by a Cuban-American songwriter who says their track features elements that are “practically identical” to his earlier tune.
In a complaint filed Tuesday in Puerto Rico federal court, lawyers for songwriter Rene Lorente claim that Karol G and Tiësto’s 2021 dance-pop hit infringed his 2000 song “Algo Diferente” by using a melody that “sounds identical.”
“It doesn’t take an expert or musician, to carefully listen to the melody/sounds of each, to recognize that one was copied from the other,” Lorente’s lawyers wrote in their complaint. “In this case, defendants’ ‘Don’t be Shy’ is a blatant violation of plaintiff’s copyrighted ‘Algo Diferente’.”
Karol G, who is currently sitting atop Billboard’s Hot Latin Songs chart with her “Qlona,” teamed up with Tiësto to release “Don’t Be Shy” in August 2021. The song, which hit No. 4 on the Hot Dance/Electronic Songs chart, was the Columbian star’s first released in English.
But in his lawsuit, Lorente claims Karol G and Tiësto’s song “misappropriated his beloved copyrighted work” – a tune released in May 2000 that currently has 3,647 total streams on Spotify. A version of “Algo Diferente” on YouTube, uploaded just nine days ago by CD Baby, has been streamed 6,423 times.
According to Lorente’s lawyers, a comparison of the two songs shows that they are “substantially similar” – the requirement to prove copyright infringement.
“Expert analysis of musical arrangement fragment of the copyrighted and infringing works, show exact rhythm, note arrangement, same intervals, harmony, with the only change being limited perhaps to the pitch, within 8 musical bars, repeated throughout infringing work,” Lorente’s lawyers wrote in his lawsuit. “However, for a lay listener and a jury, this combination of musical notes sounds identical.”
The lawsuit is seeking a whopping $52 million dollars, but attorneys who file lawsuits can claim any damages total they want. Even if Lorente’s lawsuit was successful – and that is not a given – such demands are typically not good indicators for what a judge or jury might ultimately award.
Reps for Karol G and Tiësto did not return requests for comment on Thursday.
Listen to the two songs below and compare for yourself:
[embedded content]
[embedded content]