The Legal Beat
Page: 7
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: A federal judge rules that works created by A.I. are not covered by copyrights; an appeals court revives abuse lawsuits against Michael Jackson’s companies; Smokey Robinson beats a lawsuit claiming he owed $1 million to a former manager; SoundExchange sues SiriusXM for “gaming the system” on royalties; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
No Copyrights For A.I. Works – But Tougher Questions Loom
The rise of artificial intelligence will pose many difficult legal questions for the music business, likely requiring some combination of litigation, regulation and legislation before all the dust settles. But on at least one A.I. issue, a federal judge just gave us a clean, straightforward answer.
In a decision issued Friday, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that American copyright law does not cover works created entirely by artificial intelligence – full stop. That’s because, the judge said, the essential purpose of copyright law is to encourage human beings to create new works.
“Non-human actors need no incentivization with the promise of exclusive rights under United States law, and copyright was therefore not designed to reach them,” the judge wrote.
Though novel, the decision was not entirely surprising. Federal courts have long strictly limited copyrights to content created by humans, rejecting it for works created by animals, by forces of nature, and even those claimed to have been authored by divine spirits, like religious texts.
But the ruling was nonetheless important because it came amid growing interest in the future role that could be played in the creation of music and other content by so-called generative AI tools, similar to the much-discussed ChatGPT. The issue of copyright protection is crucial to the future role of AI, since works that are not protected would be difficult to monetize.
Trickier legal dilemmas lie ahead. What if an AI-powered tool is used in the studio to create parts of a song, but human artists then add other elements? How much human direction on the use of AI tools is needed for the output to count as “human authorship”? How can a court filter out, in practical terms, elements authored by computers?
On those questions, the current answers are much squishier – something that Judge Howell hinted at in her decision. “Undoubtedly, we are approaching new frontiers in copyright as artists put AI in their toolbox to be used in the generation of new visual and other artistic works. The increased attenuation of human creativity from the actual generation of the final work will prompt challenging questions.”
“This case, however, is not nearly so complex.”
Other top stories this week…
MJ ABUSE CASES REVIVED – A California appeals court revived lawsuits filed by two men who claim Michael Jackson sexually abused them as children, ruling that they can pursue negligence claims against his companies. A lower court dismissed the cases on the grounds that staffers had no power to control Jackson, who was the sole owner of the companies. But the appeals court called such a ruling “perverse” and overturned it: “A corporation that facilitates the sexual abuse of children by one of its employees is not excused from an affirmative duty to protect those children merely because it is solely owned by the perpetrator.”
SMOKEY ROBINSON TRIAL VICTORY – The legendary Motown singer won a jury trial against a former manager who claimed he was owed nearly $1 million in touring profits, capping off more than six years of litigation over the soured partnership. Robinson himself took the stand during the case, telling jurors that the deal was never intended to cover concert revenue.
“GAMING THE SYSTEM” – SoundExchange filed a lawsuit against SiriusXM claiming the satellite radio giant is using bookmaking trickery in order to withhold more than $150 million in royalties owed to artists. The case centers on allegations that SiriusXM is manipulating how it bundles satellite services with web streaming services to “grossly underpay the royalties it owes.”
TIKTOK JUDGE RESPONDS – A judge in New Jersey defended himself against misconduct allegations over TikTok videos in which he lip-synced to Rihanna’s “Jump” and other popular songs, admitting “poor judgment” and “vulgar” lyrics but saying he should receive only a light reprimand for what intended as “silly, harmless, and innocent fun.”
LAWSUIT OVER TAKEOFF SHOOTING – Joshua Washington, an assistant to the rapper Quavo, filed a lawsuit over last year’s shooting in Houston that killed fellow Migos rapper Takeoff. He claims injuries sustained during the attack are the fault of the bowling alley where the shooting took place, which he says failed to provide adequate security, screening or emergency assistance.
GUNPLAY FACING FELONY COUNTS – The rapper Gunplay was arrested in Miami and hit with three felony charges over an alleged domestic violence incident in which he is reportedly accused of drunkenly pointing an AK-47 assault rifle at his wife and child during an argument.
FRENCH DIDN’T CLEAR SAMPLE? – The rapper French Montana was hit with a copyright lawsuit claiming his 2022 song “Blue Chills” features an unlicensed sample from singer-songwriter Skylar Gudasz. She claims he tentatively agreed to pay her for the clip – both in an upfront payment and a 50 percent share of the publishing copyright — but then never actually signed the deal.
YOUTUBE FRAUDSTER SENTENCED – Webster “Yenddi” Batista Fernandez, one of the leaders of the largest-known YouTube music royalty scam in history, was sentenced to nearly four years in prison after pleading guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy. Under the name MediaMuv, Batista and an accomplice fraudulently collected roughly $23 million in royalties from over 50,000 songs by Latin musicians ranging from small artists to global stars like Daddy Yankee.
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: Record labels sue the Internet Archive over a project to digitize old records; Dua Lipa loses a bid to dismiss one of the “Levitating” copyright lawsuits; a federal judge questions the fairness of Live Nation’s arbitration agreements with ticket buyers; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Historical Preservation or Blatant Infringement?
Like almost anything implicating copyright law, the Great 78 Project is something of a Rorschach test.
To the Internet Archive, it’s a project of “preservation, research and discovery,” aimed at creating a “digital reference collection of underrepresented artists and genres.” Digitizing hundreds of thousands of old 78rpm records is a much-needed effort to “ensure the survival of these cultural materials for future generations to study and enjoy.”
But according to a new lawsuit filed last week by Universal Music, Sony Music and Concord, the Great 78 is nothing more than “blatant” copyright infringement under a “smokescreen” of preservation.
“The Great 78 website is a massive, unauthorized, digital record store of recordings,” lawyers for the music companies wrote in the massive lawsuit this week, which claims the Internet Archive infringed more than 2,700 songs and potentially owes as much as $412 million in damages.
“Although Internet Archive describes the Great 78 Project’s goal as ‘the preservation, research and discovery of 78 rpm records,’ the Great 78 Project is actually an illegal effort to willfully defy copyright law on an astonishing scale,” the labels wrote.
At issue in the case are so-called pre-1972 songs — a category of music that was, when the Great 78 Project launched in 2006, not covered by federal sound recording copyrights. But in 2018, federal lawmakers extended such protection to the old records as part of the Music Modernization Act.
While the new law contained carveouts that allowed “non-commercial” uses of certain old records, the labels say the Internet Archive simply “ignored the new law and plowed forward as if the Music Modernization Act had never been enacted.”
For more, go read our full breakdown of the lawsuit, including access to the actual legal complaint filed against the Internet Archive.
Other top stories…
10 YEARS FOR TORY LANEZ – The rapper was sentenced to 10 years in prison for shooting Megan Thee Stallion in the foot, capping off three years of legal drama over the violent 2020 incident. The sentence was much harsher than the penalty sought by Lanez’s lawyers (just probation) but less than the 13 years that prosecutors had requested.
DUA LIPA CAN’T BEAT DISCO CASE – A federal judge ruled that Dua Lipa must face a copyright lawsuit accusing her of copying “Levitating” from a 1979 disco song, refusing the star’s early bid to end the case. Though she ruled that Lipa’s accusers had failed to show that the pop star had ever heard the song she was accused of copying, the judge said they had shown “just enough” to proceed on their claim that the song was so “strikingly similar” that it constitutes infringement.
TWITTER FIRES BACK AT PUBLISHERS – Twitter filed its first real response to a lawsuit from music publishers alleging widespread copyright infringement on the platform, arguing that it cannot be held liable for the actions of its users. The case claims that Twitter infringed over 1,700 different songs from writers like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, but in a motion to dismiss the case, lawyers for the Elon Musk-owned site (now rebranded to X) said the company itself was not on the hook for illegal posts by its users.
The 1975 KISS FALLOUT CONTINUES – The organizers of a Malaysian music festival are seeking 12.3 million ringgit ($2.7 million) in losses from British band The 1975 after lead singer Matty Healy’s on-stage protest of the country’s anti-gay laws prompted authorities to shut down the festival.
NO ARBITRATION FOR LIVE NATION – A federal judge ruled against Live Nation in an antitrust lawsuit over allegations of inflated ticket prices, declaring that the case should proceed as a federal class action rather than via private arbitration. Concertgoers opt into that out-of-court process when they buy tickets, but the judge ruled that the arbitration process posed a “serious risk of being fundamentally unfair” to consumers: “Because Defendants are often in effect the only ticketing game in town, would-be concertgoers are forced to accept Defendants’ [arbitration agreement] in full, or else forego the opportunity to attend events altogether.”
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: Taylor Swift beats a copyright case that her lawyers say “never should have been filed”; Lizzo faces a sexual harassment lawsuit from former tour dancers; a Cardi B concertgoer files a police report after the star throws a microphone at a Las Vegas show; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Taylor Swift Beats Copyright Lawsuit
“This person might as well sue anyone who’s ever written a diary or made a scrap book.”
That’s what Aaron Moss, a veteran music litigator at the firm Greenberg Glusker, told me last August, when Teresa La Dart first sued Taylor Swift for copyright infringement. The case claimed that Swift’s companion book for her album Lover had borrowed several key elements from La Dart’s self-published book of poetry, also called Lover.
The problem? That La Dart was essentially suing Swift over stock book design elements, including the use of “pastel pinks and blues,” as well as an image of the author “photographed in a downward pose.” She also alleged that Swift copied the book’s “format,” namely “a recollection of past years memorialized in a combination of written and pictorial components.”
That kind of stuff isn’t covered by copyrights – and experts said the case against Swift probably bordered on frivolous: “This lawsuit should be thrown out on a motion to dismiss, if the plaintiff’s lawyer doesn’t think better of it and voluntarily withdraw the complaint first,” Moss said at the time.
One year later, those predictions have come true. Go read our entire story on the end of the lawsuit against Swift, including the arguments from Taylor’s lawyers about how the case “never should have been filed.”
Other top stories…
HARASSMENT CASE AGAINST LIZZO – The star and her Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc. were hit with allegations from three former dancers who claimed they were subjected to sexual harassment and a hostile work environment, including being pressured to touch nude dancers during a live sex show. They also claimed Lizzo “called attention” to a dancer’s weight gain – a particularly loaded allegation against an artist who has made body positivity a central aspect of her personal brand.
ACTIVISION ISN’T PLAYING GAMES – Video game giant Activision filed a lawsuit against a prominent TikTok music critic named Anthony Fantano, accusing him of running a “scheme” to demand “extortionate” settlements over a heavily-memed video he created. Activision says Fantanto intentionally uploaded the audio from his “enough slices” video into TikTok’s free sound library, but now is unfairly threatening to sue the company and others for using it: “A textbook example of how intellectual property law can be misused.”
CARDI’S VEGAS MICROPHONE TOSS – A concertgoer filed a police report after Cardi B was captured on video at a Las Vegas event throwing her microphone at a fan who splashed her with a drink. Though police did not mention Cardi by name, the report (alleging battery) was filed by an individual who claimed to have been “struck by an item that was thrown from the stage” at the venue where the star was performing.
ASTROWORLD REPORT RELEASED – The Houston Police Department released the 1,200-page+ police report on the deadly 2021 crowd crush disaster at Astroworld, offering a full accounting of the chaos that left 10 people dead and hundreds injured. The report features transcripts of calls to 911, summaries of police interviews, and reams of text messages from that night: “I know they’ll try to fight through it but I would want it on the record that I didn’t advise this to continue,” said one festival official. “Someone’s going to end up dead.”
MATTY HEALY MALAYSIA KISS FALLOUT – The 1975 and lead singer Matty Healy could be facing legal action after he kissed a male bandmate on stage at a concert in Malaysia and sharply criticized the country’s anti-LGBTQ+ policies. The stunt – criticized by some local gay rights activists as counterproductive – resulted in the Malaysian government canceling the rest of the three-day Good Vibes Festival, citing Healy’s “controversial conduct and remarks.”
LAST CALL FOR PRE-1972 SONGS – More than nine years after members of the 1960s rock band The Turtles filed a series of groundbreaking lawsuits over the legal protections for so-called pre-1972 sound recordings, a federal judge dismissed their final case — a lawsuit against Pandora that he called the band’s “last case standing.”
JOHN SUMMIT ENDS NAME CONTROVERSY – DJ John Summit vowed to change the name of his new record label (Off The Grid) and apologized after a brief – but very public — legal dispute with a smaller company that had been using the name for dance music events for the better part of a decade.
Subscribe to The Legal Beat here for free.
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: Lady Gaga defeats a lawsuit claiming she owes a $500,000 reward to a woman convicted over the 2021 gunpoint robbery of the star’s French bulldogs; Kanye West faces another lawsuit about allegations of unsafe conditions at his Donda Academy; Diddy makes new racism accusations in an unsealed version of his tequila lawsuit; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Lady Gaga Doesn’t Have To Pay Her Dog-Napper
When Jennifer McBride sued Lady Gaga in February, demanding that the star pay out on a $500,000 reward she’d offered for the return of her stolen French bulldogs, McBride left out one very small detail: that she herself had been convicted of a crime over the violent 2021 robbery.
McBride was one of five people charged in connection with the Feb. 2021 gunpoint dog-napping, in which Gaga’s dog walker, Ryan Fischer, was shot and nearly killed. Though she returned the dogs days after the incident and claimed she’d found them tied to a pole, police later connected McBride to the thieves and she eventually pleaded out to one count of receiving stolen property.
But in a chutzpah-laden civil lawsuit, McBride claimed that Gaga made a binding “unilateral” offer to pay the reward in return for the safe return of the dogs, citing media reports that the offer would be paid with “no questions asked.” McBride said that regardless of her role in the crime, she had simply held up her end of a valid contract.
Gaga’s attorneys begged to differ, arguing last month that it would be absurd to allow McBride to “profit from her participation in a crime” even if she had eventually returned the dogs: “The law does not allow a person to commit a crime and then profit from it,” Gaga’s lawyers wrote.
In a ruling on Monday (July 10), Judge Holly J. Fujie agreed with those arguments, dismissing the case. To find out why, go read our entire story, which contains a link to the judge’s full written ruling.
Other top stories this week…
MORE DONDA ACADEMY ACCUSATIONS – Kanye West was hit with another lawsuit about allegedly unsafe conditions at his Donda Academy, including the bizarre accusation that the school lacked windows because the embattled rapper “did not like glass.” The case came months after a separate case that claimed the rapper fed students only sushi and that he was “afraid of stairs.”
NEW CLAIMS IN DIDDY TEQUILA CASE – An unredacted version of Diddy’s lawsuit against Diageo revealed new details about his allegations that the spirits giant unfairly treated his DeLeon Tequila as a “Black brand.” Among the new accusations was a claim that Diageo developed a watermelon flavor despite Diddy’s protests about the racist history and negative connotations with watermelon in brands aimed at Black consumers.
DABABY DROPPED FROM ‘LEVITATING’ CASE – The rapper was voluntarily dismissed from a copyright lawsuit accusing him and Dua Lipa of ripping off their smash hit “Levitating” from a 1979 song called “Wiggle and Giggle All Night” and a 1980 song called “Don Diablo.” The rapper had been named because he was featured on a popular remix of Lipa’s smash hit, which spent more than a year on the Hot 100.
CHALLENGE TO TIKTOK BAN – TikTok and a group of five users asked a federal judge to block Montana from enforcing its first-in-the-nation law banning the video-sharing app from the state, warning that the law is unconstitutional and could cause irreparable harm if allowed to go into effect in January.
ARETHA FRANKLIN ESTATE BATTLE – A jury in Michigan decided that a handwritten document created by singer Aretha Franklin in 2014 and found in her couch after her 2018 death was a valid will, overriding a 2010 will that was discovered around the same time in a locked cabinet.
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: Dr. Luke and Kesha end their long-running lawsuit with a settlement just weeks before trial; the RIAA takes legal action against a popular message board centered on artificial intelligence-driven voice mimicry; Kanye West aims to dismiss a lawsuit accusing him of illegally sampling a legendary hip hop group; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Dr. Luke v. Kesha Ends With Settlement
After nearly a decade of bitter litigation between Kesha and Dr. Luke, in which she accused him of rape and he accused her of defaming him by doing so, the lawsuit will end not with a blockbuster trial, but with joint statements wishing each other well.
Just weeks before the case had been set to go to trial, the two sides announced that they had reached a settlement to resolve the long fight, which kicked off in 2014 after Kesha accused her former producer of drugging and raping her after a 2005 party.
The start of the lawsuit pre-dated the #MeToo movement, but it foreshadowed many of the themes that would characterize much of the litigation arising from that cultural reckoning. Dr. Luke claimed her “vengeful” allegations had been designed to “extort” him into releasing her from her record deal; Kesha claimed he was using the court system to silence and bully a victim who spoke out.
It’s not hard to speculate why Dr. Luke settled rather than test his defamation claims before a jury. Ten days before the deal was reached, New York’s top appeals court finally weighed in on key issues that had long delayed the case, and the result wasn’t good for the producer. The court not only said he was a “public figure” – a designation that makes it extremely hard to win libel cases in American courts – but also that Kesha could potentially recoup her legal bills if she won at trial.
But with or without a courthouse showdown, Dr. Luke appears to have gotten some of what he wanted. In their joint statement, Kesha said that “only god knows what happened that night” and that she “cannot recount everything that happened.” In the same joint statement, Dr. Luke was unequivocal: “I never drugged or assaulted her and would never do that to anyone.”
Go read the full statements, and the long backstory of the case, in our story on the big settlement.
Other top stories this week…
FLORIDA DRAG LAW BLOCKED – A federal judge barred Florida from enforcing its recently enacted restrictions on drag performances, ruling that the law likely violates the First Amendment. Proponents of the statute, including presidential hopeful Gov. Ron DeSantis, claimed it was needed to protect children from “lewd” performances, but the judge said the vague new rules were “dangerously susceptible to standardless, overbroad enforcement which could sweep up substantial protected speech.”
RIAA’S AI CRACKDOWN – Lawyers for the industry group moved to shut down a popular Discord server centered on artificial intelligence and voice models called “AI Hub,” obtaining a federal court subpoena to reveal the identities of its users and sending takedown request demanding that Discord shut down the entire channel. The RIAA’s actions are the latest effort by music companies to rein in the disruptive new technology.
NO SCOTUS FOR GENIUS – The U.S. Supreme Court said that it would not take up a lawsuit claiming Google stole millions of song lyrics from Genius, the popular music database that lets users add and annotate lyrics. Genius claimed Google free-rode on the site’s work, but multiple lower courts had ruled that the site couldn’t sue over copyrighted lyrics it didn’t actually own.
SUMMERTIME SETTLEMENT – Lana Del Rey reached a settlement to end a copyright lawsuit claiming her 2012 music video for “Summertime Sadness” featured 17 seconds of material lifted directly from a short film by a director named Lucas Bolaño. The agreement came weeks after a federal judge denied a motion to dismiss the case filed by Del Rey’s lawyers, who argued that the case was filed well after the statute of limitations.
TROY AVE SHOOTER SENTENCED – Hip-hop podcaster Taxstone was sentenced to 35 years in prison following his conviction earlier this year on manslaughter charges over his 2016 fatal shooting of rapper Troy Ave’s bodyguard during a T.I. concert at a New York City venue. His attorneys told Billboard they would appeal: “Justice wasn’t served.”
BOOSIE RELEASED ON GUN CHARGE – Rapper Boosie Badazz was ordered released on bond on his federal gun charge, after a judge rejected a request by prosecutors to keep him behind bars even longer. The charge follows a May 6 traffic stop in which the feds say the New Orleans rapper was found with a handgun — an alleged violation of a federal law prohibiting former felons from possessing firearms.
KANYE RIPS SAMPLING LAWSUIT – With Kanye West facing a lawsuit for allegedly using an uncleared sample from the pioneering rap group Boogie Down Productions, his lawyers made an unusual argument: That BDP founder KRS-One had “emphatically” stated in a 2006 documentary that “my entire catalogue is open to the public” and “you will not get sued if you sample.”
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: Twitter is facing a lawsuit from dozens of music publishers over copyright infringement; Bad Bunny, Daddy Yankee and other reggaeton stars fight back against a massive lawsuit; unsealed documents offer key details on the gun charges against Boosie BadAzz; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Twitter’s $250 Million Music Problem
In last week’s least surprising development, the music publishers sued Twitter. After years of warnings from National Music Publishers’ Association — David Israelite called Elon Musk’s website his “top legal focus” earlier this year — dozens of the group’s members filed a sweeping copyright lawsuit in federal court.
Surprise or not, the case is a big deal. The publishers claim that Twitter has infringed over 1,700 different songs from writers like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé — a claim that, if proven, could put the social media giant on the hook for as much as $255 million in damages.
Damages aren’t likely the end goal for the publishers. Licensing deals outside the realm of plain ole music streaming, ranging from social media sites like Instagram to gaming platforms like Roblox to fitness services like Peloton, have become an increasingly large slice of the revenue pie for publishers and songwriters in recent years. But many of those deals only came as settlements to lawsuits — just ask Roblox and Peloton. Twitter, the publishers say, is one of the last holdouts refusing to sign such a deal.
To read more about the lawsuit, including the actual complaint itself, go read our entire story here.
If it doesn’t end in a quick settlement, the case will also be a fascinating look at the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, a federal law that limits how websites like Twitter can be sued over copyright infringement by their users — and one that has long frustrated content owners. The DMCA provides sites like Twitter with immunity from litigation over material uploaded by their users, so long as they promptly remove infringing content and ban repeated violators from the platform. The new lawsuit claims Twitter failed to do either of those things, meaning the site has legally forfeited the DMCA’s protections.
In that sense, the lawsuit against Twitter is something of spiritual sequel to a series of cases filed against internet service providers like Cox, which pioneered the argument that providers had waived the DMCA’s safe harbor by failing to crack down on subscribers who repeatedly infringed. After a federal judge ruled that Cox had lost the DMCA’s protections, a jury later ordered the company to pay $1 billion in damages to the three major music companies. Yes, billion, with a “B.”
Will those same arguments work against Twitter? Stay tuned.
Other top stories this week…
MASSIVE REGGAETON CASE – Bad Bunny, Daddy Yankee, Karol G and dozens of other artists asked a federal judge to toss out a sprawling copyright lawsuit that claims hundreds of reggaeton tracks infringed a single 1989 song. In their motion to end the case, Daddy Yankee and many other stars argued that the accusers are “effectively claiming ownership of an entire genre of music.” Bad Bunny, in his own filing, said the case aims to “stake monopolistic control over the reggaeton genre.”
BOOSIE BADAZZ GUN CHARGE – Newly-unsealed charging documents against rapper Boosie Badazz revealed that his recent federal gun charge came after San Diego police tracked his Instagram account and even used a helicopter to locate him in an allegedly gang-affiliated neighborhood.
BAD SERVICE? A judge ruled that Sony Music Entertainment could serve a copyright lawsuit on a TikTok rapper by sending him a message through his DMs. The ruling detailed how the label’s lawyers had spent months unsuccessfully trying to do so in-person — including showing up to his mom’s house on Mother’s Day “in hopes that he would be there to celebrate with her.”
50 CENT ENDS BOOZE BATTLE – The rapper reached a settlement with Rémy Martin to resolve a lawsuit that claimed his Branson brand of cognac copied the design of the company’s bottles. The confidential deal will end litigation that 50 Cent’s company had called “meritless” and designed to “destroy a competitor.”
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: A man who unsuccessfully sued Cardi B over an album cover agrees to repay her $350,000 legal bill; Kesha wins a major appellate ruling in her ongoing defamation battle with Dr. Luke; Dua Lipa’s copyright accusers drop their case for good; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Don’t Mess With Cardi B (Or Her Lawyers)
Omar Little, the notorious Baltimore stick-up man who robs drug dealers on HBO’s The Wire, once famously said: “You come at the king, you best not miss.” Well, that same sentiment seems to be increasingly true about Cardi B and her team of lawyers: If you come at her, you better be sure you’re ready for the consequences.
Back in 2017, a guy named Kevin Brophy did exactly that, suing the superstar for millions in damages. His case claimed that Cardi had left him “humiliated” after an image of his enormous back tattoo was inadvertently photoshopped onto the “raunchy” cover of her debut mixtape, Gangsta Bitch Music, Vol. 1.
But now, six years later, it’s Brophy who’s paying Cardi, not the other way around.
Months after a federal jury rejected his lawsuit, Brophy agreed this week to hand over a whopping $350,000 in legal bills that the superstar spent defeating his case. He also agreed to voluntarily end his efforts to revive the case and waived any chance at a future appeal.
Why would he do all that? Go read our full story here to find out.
For Cardi, turning the tables on Brophy is just the latest financial trouncing of a legal opponent.
Late last month, a gossip blogger named Tasha K who made salacious claims against the rapper was forced to file for bankruptcy after Cardi B won more than $3 million in a defamation lawsuit against her. Shortly after Cardi won that verdict, she tweeted “imma come for everything” along with the acronym BBHMM — “bitch better have my money” — and then spent months chasing the cash, including seizing money from Tasha’s YouTube royalty account.
The takeaway? At least when it comes to legal matters: You come at the queen, you best not miss.
Other top stories this week…
KESHA v. DR. LUKE RULING – New York’s top appeals court handed a key victory to Kesha in her legal battle with Dr. Luke, making it more difficult for him to prove at a looming trial that she defamed the producer when she accused him of rape in 2014. The court said Dr. Luke was a “public figure,” meaning he will need to show that Kesha acted with “actual malice” when she made her statements — a notoriously difficult legal hurdle to clear.
DUA LIPA CASE CLOSED – A Florida reggae band called Artikal Sound System decided to drop its copyright case accusing Dua Lipa of copying her smash hit song “Levitating” from their earlier track. The move — a unilateral capitulation, not a confidential cash settlement — came just days after a federal judge cast serious doubt on whether Artikal would be able to prove that Lipa ever even heard the song she was accused of stealing.
JIMMIE ALLEN SUED AGAIN – The country star was hit with a second sexual abuse lawsuit, claiming he assaulted a woman in a Las Vegas hotel room and filmed the encounter without permission. The case came a month after Allen was accused of sexually harassing and raping a woman on his management team. Allen has strongly denied the allegations and has vowed to “mount a vigorous defense.”
TORY LANEZ SENTENCING – Los Angeles prosecutors formally asked a judge to impose a 13-year prison sentence on Tory Lanez after he was convicted last year of shooting Megan Thee Stallion, telling a judge that Lanez had “waged a campaign to humiliate and re-traumatize the victim” in the wake of the 2020 incident. Sentencing had been set for this week but was rescheduled to Aug 7.
MUSIC AS SEX DISCRIMINATION – The Ninth Circuit issued a first-of-its-kind ruling that said blasting music with “sexually graphic” and “violently misogynistic” lyrics in a workplace could violate federal discrimination laws. Reviving a case against a company that played songs like Too $hort‘s “Blowjob Betty” and Eminem‘s “Stan” at its Nevada warehouse, the court said the music potentially created a “hostile or abusive environment.”
COURT RIPS BAD SETTLEMENT – In another big music ruling, the Ninth Circuit overturned a class action settlement in a royalties lawsuit against the relaunched Napster, sharply criticizing an “unreasonable” deal that secured just $53,000 for songwriters while paying their lawyers a whopping $1.7 million in legal fees. The court said that paying attorneys “more than 30 times the amount that the class received” was likely to “make the average person shake her head in disbelief.”
YOUTUBE CASE DROPPED – Just a day before it had been set to go to trial, a Grammy Award-winning composer dropped her closely-watched lawsuit against YouTube over access to its anti-piracy tools like Content ID. The ruling came weeks after a federal judge gutted the case by refusing to let it move forward as a class action — a ruling the composer had said would “gravely undermine” the goals of her lawsuit.
ASTROWORLD GAG ORDER STANDS – A Texas appeals court refused to lift a strict gag order on the lawsuit over the deadly 2021 disaster at Travis Scott‘s Astroworld festival. The court was unmoved by arguments from ABC News, which argued that the “sweeping” restrictions clearly violated the First Amendment’s protections on free speech and had created a “news desert” in which almost no reliable information about an important case is being shared with the public.
COVID RELIEF HIJINKS? The owners of a small Palm Springs, Calif., venue filed a lawsuit against Marc Geiger and his company SaveLive, claiming the former WME agent deceived them into accepting an investment in their venue during the COVID-19 pandemic as part of a ruse to take over the business without paying a fair price.
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 move to seize R. Kelly’s funds held by Sony Music and Universal Music Publishing Group; Dua Lipa wins the first round in her copyright battle over “Levitating”; a federal judge rules that Tennessee’s anti-drag law is unconstitutional; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Feds Move to Seize R. Kelly’s Royalty Funds
In the wake of criminal convictions that will see him spend decades in prison, R. Kelly is also facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and restitution payments. Last week, the feds told his record label and music publisher to help him pay up.
Prosecutors in Brooklyn asked a federal judge for so-called writs of garnishment against Sony Music and Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) — court orders that would compel the two companies to hand over funds tied to Kelly. The two companies are “in possession of property” belonging to Kelly, the filing said, that could be used to pay down the $504,289 he owes to victims and the government.
It’s unclear how much Sony Music and UMPG are holding in Kelly-tied money, but the feds aren’t the only ones trying to get at it.
R. Kelly victim Heather Williams, who won a $4 million civil judgment against the singer, is also seeking to tap into the Sony Music account — as is Midwest Commercial Funding, a property management company that won a separate $3.5 million ruling against Kelly over unpaid rent at a Chicago studio.
In March, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that Williams had priority to the funds over Midwest Commercial Funding because she was the first to properly demand the money from Sony. But that ruling left unclear whether she’ll enjoy similar priority over federal prosecutors.
For the full story, go read the entire article, which includes access to the full legal documents filed in court.
Other top stories this week…
DUA LIPA WINS ROUND ONE – A federal judge cast serious doubts on a copyright lawsuit claiming Dua Lipa stole her smash hit song “Levitating” from a little-known reggae track by a band called Artikal Sound System, saying she’s seen no evidence that Lipa ever even heard the song she’s accused of copying.
ADIDAS DROPS YEEZY MONEY CASE – And just like that, it was over. After a whirlwind week of litigation, Adidas abruptly dropped a federal court case aimed at freezing $75 million held by Kanye West’s Yeezy brand. But the two companies will continue to battle it out in a private arbitration case, in which Adidas will likely argue that West’s “offensive conduct” caused the breakdown of their long-standing partnership.
KANYE SUED OVER PAPS CLASH – In other Kanye legal news, the embattled rapper was hit with a civil assault lawsuit over an alleged incident in which the rapper grabbed a paparazzo’s phone and threw it into traffic.
TENN. DRAG LAW RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL – A federal judge ruled that Tennessee’s first-in-the-nation law restricting drag shows violates the First Amendment, barring prosecutors in Memphis from enforcing the new statute and sending the closely-watched legal battle to a federal appeals court.
DIDDY ACCUSES BOOZE GIANT OF RACISM – Sean “Diddy” Combs filed a scathing lawsuit against alcohol giant Diageo for allegedly breaching their partnership deal for a brand of tequila, leveling accusations of racism at the company and claiming it has treated his product line “worse than others because he is Black.”
HOV WINS $7M OVER COLOGNE DEAL – A New York state appeals court sided with Jay-Z in his long legal battle against a fragrance company called Parlux over a cologne endorsement deal that went bad, ordering the company to pay him nearly $7 million in unpaid royalties.
PRODUCER ACCUSED OF HARASSMENT – A new lawsuit filed in Los Angeles claims that Grammy-nominated dance music producer and DJ Paul Oakenfold repeatedly masturbated in front of his former personal assistant. He quickly denied the accusations, calling them “a calculated attempt to tarnish my reputation and extort money.”
SHEERAN CASE HEADS TO APPEAL – A month after Ed Sheeran won a high-profile jury verdict that his “Thinking Out Loud” did not infringe Marvin Gaye‘s “Let’s Get It On,” his copyright accusers formally launched their appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit.
INDIE ROCKERS SETTLE CEREAL SPAT – The band OK Go reached a confidential settlement to end a bizarre legal battle with Post Foods over a new line of on-the-go cereal packages called “OK Go!,” which the band believed infringed the trademark rights to its name.
K-POP INSIDER TRADING? – Three employees at the record label HYBE could reportedly be prosecuted for insider trading in South Korea for allegedly using non-public information about K-pop group BTS’ planned hiatus before the news was given to investors.
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: A messy legal battle between Adidas and Kanye West spills into the open; a YouTuber who defamed Cardi B declares bankruptcy to avoid a $4 million judgment; prosecutors call for a harsh sentence against Tory Lanez over the Megan Thee Stallion shooting; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Adidas v. Kanye
Thanks to newly-unsealed court records, the messy legal fallout from Kanye West’s high-profile split with Adidas is now coming into view.
Federal court records obtained by Billboard last week show that Adidas launched private arbitration proceedings last fall, shortly after the company terminated its long-standing partnership with West and his Yeezy brand in the wake of the rapper’s antisemitic statements. As part of that case, the company secretly sought – and won – an “attachment” order from a federal judge, freezing $75 million in Adidas money that’s allegedly sitting in Yeezy bank accounts.
Secretly? Yes, this case is a treasure trove for legal procedure nerds. The case was not only filed under seal and kept that way for months, but also on a so-called ex parte basis — meaning the judge issued the freeze without giving West or Yeezy a chance to make counter-arguments, saying there was a risk the rapper would have moved the money if given advanced notice.
But now, the case is spilling into the open. In a ruling earlier this month that unsealed the record, the judge cited the fact that Kanye himself had once mentioned the litigation on social media. And in a ruling Friday, that same judge overturned the ex parte freeze entirely, saying Adidas had failed to meet procedural requirements and had “deprived” Yeezy of a fair chance to fight back.
In the wake of that order, lawyers for Adidas are currently scrambling, seeking to have a new freeze imposed on the company. We’ll update you when we know more, so stay tuned.
Other top stories…
MORE KANYE PROBLEMS – Adidas isn’t the only former business partner in litigation with West. The Gap filed a case earlier in the week, alleging the rapper made unapproved changes to a Los Angeles retail location that resulted in an expensive lawsuit from the building’s owner.
B*TCH BETTER HAVE MY MONEY? – Eighteen months after Cardi B won a $4 million defamation verdict over salacious claims made by a YouTube host named Tasha K, the gossip blogger filed for bankruptcy, saying she has less than $60,000 in total assets to pay out.
FETTY WAP GETS SIX YEARS – The “Trap Queen” star was ordered to spend six years in federal prison, after pleading guilty last year to federal drug charges. His attorneys had asked for only a five-year sentence; prosecutors wanted as many as nine, citing music that they said had helped “glamorize the drug trade.”
GENIUS v. GOOGLE AT SCOTUS – The Department of Justice urged the U.S. Supreme Court to avoid a case alleging Google stole millions of song lyrics from the music database Genius, calling it a “poor vehicle” for a high court showdown.
TORY LANEZ SENTENCE LOOMS – Los Angeles prosecutors asked a judge to impose a harsh sentence against rapper Tory Lanez after he was convicted last year of shooting Megan Thee Stallion, arguing he behaved with “indifference for human life” at a moment when Megan was “particularly vulnerable.”
GOOGLE FACES $32M PATENT VERDICT – A federal jury ordered the tech giant to pay Sonos the huge sum for infringing one of its smart speaker patents, awarding the smaller company $2.30 for each of the more than 14 million Google devices that were sold incorporating the patented technology.
MIGOS ALLEGED KILLER INDICTED – A Texas grand jury formally issued a murder indictment against Patrick Xavier Clark, the man who was arrested and charged last year in the slaying of Migos rapper TakeOff.
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: Lawyers for Fetty Wap battle with prosecutors ahead of his sentencing over federal drug charges; the Supreme Court issues a major copyright ruling on Andy Warhol’s images of Prince; Ed Sheeran wins another lawsuit over “Let’s Get It On”; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Fetty Wap Faces Drug Sentencing
With Fetty Wap facing sentencing this week for his conviction on federal drug charges, the rapper’s lawyers and prosecutors are battling over how much prison time he should receive — and in the process, they’ve dipped into one of music’s biggest legal controversies.
Attorneys for the rapper, who pleaded guilty in August to participating in “a multimillion-dollar bicoastal drug distribution organization,” asked a judge last week to sentence him to just five years — the minimum under the law. They say he only turned to crime to support family members as his touring income dried up during the COVID-19 pandemic.
But prosecutors quickly fired back with a darker story: Of a successful musician who had already earned millions but chose to “supplement his income” by selling “drugs he knew would ruin lives.” And notably, they cited Fetty’s music itself, claiming he should receive a harsher punishment in part because he used his songs to “glamorize the drug trade.”
“Before his arrest, the defendant became famous singing about his experience cooking crack cocaine, selling drugs and making substantial money from those illegal endeavors,” prosecutors wrote. “Young people who admire the defendant and are considering selling drugs need to be sent a message.”
If you’ve been following music law for the past year, you’ll know that’s a controversial move.
After a high-profile gang indictment against Young Thug in Atlanta, the use of rap lyrics in criminal cases has come under increasing scrutiny. Critics say references to drugs and violence are stock elements of hip-hop and should not be treated literally — and that by doing so, prosecutors infringe on free speech and sway courts with unfair evidence, with predictably disproportionate harm inflicted on Black artists.
Lawmakers in California recently enacted a law that sharply restricts the practice, and legislators in New York seem poised to pass a similar bill later this year. A federal bill to limit when lyrics can be used in cases like the one against Fetty Wap was re-introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives last month but faces a less clear path to passage than the state-level measures.
To get the full story, including the actual legal documents filed by both sides, go read our full articles on the sentencing recommendations from Fetty Wap and from prosecutors.
Other top stories…
SCOTUS RULES ON WARHOL & FAIR USE – Ruling on a case that record labels and publishers called “critical to the American music industry,” the U.S. Supreme Court said that Andy Warhol did not make “fair use” of a photographer’s copyrights when he used her images of Prince to create one of his distinctive screen prints. The ruling essentially maintained the status quo for music companies, who feared that a decision for Warhol could have disrupted industry practices for sampling, or possibly given legal cover for AI companies to use copyrighted songs.
JIMI HENDRIX DISPUTES HEADS TO UK – A transatlantic legal battle between Jimi Hendrix’s estate and his former bandmates — over control of the rights to music created by the trio’s Jimi Hendrix Experience — is going to be fought primarily in London for now, after a U.S. federal judge ruled that she would defer to the British courts.
ED SHEERAN WINS AGAIN – Less than two weeks after Ed Sheeran won a blockbuster jury trial over whether his “Thinking Out Loud” infringed Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On,” a federal judge dismissed a second, closely-related copyright case accusing him of copying the same iconic song.
YOUTUBE WON’T FACE CLASS ACTION – A federal judge dealt a major blow to a lawsuit that claims YouTube enables piracy by restricting access to copyright tools like Content ID, refusing to allow the case to proceed as a class action that could have included tens of thousands of rightsholders.
FACIAL-RECOGNITION FIGHT CONTINUES – The owner of Madison Square Garden Entertainment filed a new legal action demanding access to the phone records of a New York state liquor investigator, opening a new front in a sprawling legal war over the use of facial recognition technology to ban lawyers from venues.