K-Pop Group NewJeans Officially Exits HYBE’s ADOR Amid Contract Disputes
November 29, 2024
Rising K-Pop group NewJeans has announced its departure from HYBE’s ADOR label, citing dissatisfaction with HYBE’s handling of internal issues and alleged contractual violations. The decision follows a two-week ultimatum issued by the group demanding the reinstatement of former ADOR head Min Hee-Jin and better treatment of a NewJeans member. NewJeans stated that remaining under ADOR would cause “mental stress” and be “a waste of time.”
The group unilaterally terminated its contract, claiming HYBE failed to protect its interests. However, ADOR asserts the contract remains valid through 2029 and has called for a resolution meeting, which NewJeans has declined. The group also announced plans to fulfill professional obligations in Japan and hinted at performing under a new name.
This development follows a year-long dispute between Min Hee-Jin and HYBE, which included allegations of image overlap between NewJeans and another group, leadership conflicts, and multiple legal actions. Min’s departure earlier this month prompted NewJeans’ ultimatum, and the group has expressed interest in working with her again.
Fans are divided on social media, with some criticizing HYBE and others supporting the company. Meanwhile, HYBE’s stock has suffered a significant decline, dropping 11% this week and over 19% from its 2024 peak, reflecting investor concerns about the impact on revenue and future talent development.
The fallout from this dispute could have broader implications for K-Pop, as NewJeans’ stance challenges long-term contracts that are often criticized for being overly restrictive. Other artists may be inspired to follow suit, potentially reshaping industry norms.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Label Dispute, K-Pop
U.S. Customs Seize $18 Million in Counterfeit Gibson Guitars
November 27, 2024
More in Gibson news, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers have confiscated over $18 million in counterfeit Gibson guitars, marking the largest counterfeit musical instrument seizure in CBP history. The fake guitars, arriving in ocean containers from Asia, were intercepted through coordinated efforts involving Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. Gibson confirmed the guitars were counterfeit, emphasizing that genuine Gibson instruments are exclusively handcrafted in the U.S.
Further Resources
Tags: Instruments
Drake Takes Rap Beef to Court over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us”
November 26, 2024
Drake has filed two legal actions against Universal Music Group (UMG), Spotify, and iHeart Radio alleging defamation and fraudulent practices in promoting Kendrick Lamar’s song “Not Like Us,” which reportedly includes false accusations against him.
In the first, he filed a petition in New York State Supreme Court (a trial court, not the highest court in New York), Drake accused UMG and Spotify of manipulating streaming data through bots, reduced licensing rates, and influencer promotions to artificially boost Lamar’s track. In the second, he filed a request for depositions of corporate representative from UMG and iHeart Radio in a Texas state court based on allegations of a “pay-to-play,” or “payola,” scheme wherein UMG funneled payments to iHeartRadio to prioritize the song on radio.
Drake claims UMG deliberately released the track to harm his reputation and profit from the controversy, despite knowing its lyrics falsely portray him as a predator. His filings suggest the evidence supports defamation, fraud, and racketeering claims.
UMG has strongly denied the allegations, describing them as “offensive and untrue.” The label insists it adheres to ethical marketing practices and dismissed Drake’s accusations as baseless, stating that “fans choose the music they want to hear.” UMG also refuted claims of bot use and payola, calling the legal arguments “contrived and absurd.”
This escalating conflict highlights a deepening rift between Drake and UMG, a label he has been associated with his entire career. Meanwhile, Kendrick Lamar, who is also signed to UMG, has not been named as a respondent or accused of any wrongdoing. The outcome of these cases could have significant implications for promotional ethics and the relationship between artists and their labels.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Defamation, Label Dispute
Gibson Issues Cease-and-Desist Over Trump-Endorsed Guitars, Alleging Trademark Infringement
November 25, 2024
Guitar manufacturer Gibson has issued a cease-and-desist order against 16 Creative, the branding agency behind a line of guitars endorsed by President-elect Donald Trump. The company accuses the agency of infringing on its trademarked “iconic Les Paul body shape” in the design of the “Trump Guitars” line.
The Trump Guitars, unveiled on November 20 via Trump’s Truth Social platform, feature patriotic imagery like a bald eagle, the American flag, and Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan. Retailing between $1,250 and $11,500, the line includes acoustic and electric guitars, as well as a high-end signature model. The guitars are marketed as “officially endorsed by President Donald J. Trump” and were designed in collaboration with a master luthier by a veteran-owned company, using domestic and international parts. While the legal action targets 16 Creative, Trump himself is not named in the order.
The Trump Guitars are sold exclusively through the website GetTrumpGuitars.com, which notes that 1,275 guitars were manufactured, with some styles already sold out.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Trademark, Instruments
UMG Responds to Limp Bizkit’s $200M Lawsuit Alleging Hidden Royalties
November 25, 2024
Universal Music Group (UMG) has formally responded to Limp Bizkit frontman Fred Durst’s $200 million lawsuit, calling the allegations of concealed royalties “fiction” and demanding the case’s dismissal.
The band’s lawsuit, filed in October in the U.S. court for the Central District of California, accused UMG of failing to pay royalties for decades and engaging in systemic practices to defraud artists. UMG argues that the lawsuit is baseless, pointing to emails included in the band’s own complaint that allegedly undermine their claims. The emails reveal that a senior UMG royalties executive had reached out to the band’s business manager, Paul Ta, to facilitate royalty payments, only to be told that most band members, including Durst, had assigned their royalty shares to other entities and were not entitled to payments. UMG asserts that once this issue was clarified, it paid approximately $3.4 million in royalties to the band and affiliated entities.
Durst’s lawsuit alleged that UMG’s bookkeeping practices falsely kept Limp Bizkit’s accounts in the red, preventing royalty payments. The band claims they had not received any royalties until taking legal action, despite being one of the biggest acts of the early 2000s. UMG disputes this, stating the payments were made once logistical issues were resolved and accusing the band of filing the lawsuit based on “suspicion” rather than evidence. In response, Durst’s attorney, Mark Fabiani, dismissed UMG’s defense as a typical legal strategy to dismiss valid claims. Fabiani described UMG’s motion as relying on technicalities to avoid addressing deeper allegations of fraud. The lawsuit remains ongoing, with Limp Bizkit alleging breach of contract and fraud while seeking rescission of their agreements with UMG.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Royalties
Nelly’s St. Lunatics Bandmates Withdraw From Royalties Lawsuit Over Country Grammar
November 25, 2024
Three members of the hip hop group St. Lunatics—Murphy Lee, Kyjuan, and City Spud—have officially withdrawn from a lawsuit that alleged Nelly failed to credit and compensate the group for contributions to his 2000 breakout album, Country Grammar. Filed in September by Ali (Ali Jones), Murphy Lee, Kyjuan, and City Spud, the lawsuit claimed Nelly manipulated the bandmates into believing they would share in the album’s financial success but never delivered on those promises.
Shortly after the suit was filed, the three members publicly distanced themselves, stating they had not authorized the legal action. Their names were formally removed in an updated complaint filed Friday, leaving Ali as the sole plaintiff pursuing unpaid royalties. Ali’s attorney, Precious Felder Gates, confirmed her client’s commitment to seeking compensation, stating that Ali is determined to protect his creative contributions despite others stepping away.
The amended lawsuit also added HarbourView Equity Partners—purchaser of Nelly’s $50 million catalog in 2022—as a defendant, suggesting the sale played a role in sparking the legal dispute. Ali’s attorneys claim the catalog sale underscores Nelly’s refusal to fulfill promises made to his former bandmate.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Band Disputes
SiriusXM Found to Violate Federal Law Over Subscription Cancellation Process
November 22, 2024
A New York State judge has ruled that SiriusXM violated the federal Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA) by requiring subscribers to go through a complicated cancellation process, including speaking to live agents and enduring long wait times. The lawsuit, filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James, argued that the satellite radio company made it harder to cancel subscriptions than to sign up, amounting to a “burdensome endurance contest.”
The New York State Supreme Court (a trial court in New York, not the highest court) dismissed the other four counts in the suit however, including allegations of fraud or deceptive practices under New York state law. The judge noted that while the cancellation policies were frustrating, they did not constitute outright fraud, citing SiriusXM’s efforts to prevent such conduct through agent training materials.
SiriusXM plans to appeal the ruling, but the decision entitles New York to an injunction forcing the company to simplify its cancellation procedures and potentially face monetary penalties. Attorney General James emphasized that the ruling protects consumers and ensures a more straightforward cancellation process in New York.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
Miley Cyrus Challenges “Flowers” Copyright Lawsuit Over Bruno Mars Track
November 21, 2024
Miley Cyrus has responded to a lawsuit accusing her hit song “Flowers” of infringing on Bruno Mars’ 2012 track “When I Was Your Man,” arguing that the case has a “fatal flaw.” The lawsuit, filed by Tempo Music Investments in the U.S. court for the Central District of California, stems from their purchase of partial rights to the Mars song from co-writer Philip Lawrence. Cyrus’ attorneys argue that Tempo lacks standing to sue because it owns only non-exclusive rights, making its claim invalid under federal copyright law. Tempo’s lead attorney, pushed back, stating the company has rightful ownership and standing to pursue the case, dismissing Cyrus’ defense as a “bogus technical argument.”
The lawsuit claims “Flowers” borrowed from “Your Man,” including melodic, harmonic, and structural elements, but Cyrus contends that any similarities are unprotected musical “building blocks.”
The case has reignited debates over the extent to which a song can legally reference or allude to another, particularly as “Flowers” has been described by fans as an “answer song” linked to Cyrus’ ex-husband Liam Hemsworth.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
Donald Trump Settles Copyright Lawsuit Over Unauthorized Use of Eddy Grant’s “Electric Avenue”
November 21, 2024
Donald Trump and Eddy Grant have reached a settlement in a copyright lawsuit over Trump’s unauthorized use of the 1982 hit “Electric Avenue” in a 2020 campaign video. The settlement follows a September ruling in which a federal judge determined that Trump had infringed Grant’s copyright by using the track in a political ad without permission. The terms of the settlement, including the amount Trump must pay in damages, remain undisclosed.
The case centered on a campaign video featuring a “Trump” train outpacing a handcar operated by Joe Biden, accompanied by Grant’s song. Trump’s attorneys argued that the video was a fair use of the track, transforming its original meaning into political commentary. However, the judge rejected this defense, stating the video offered no satire or critique of the song or Grant, and was simply a “wholesale copying of music” for a campaign ad.
This case is one of several legal disputes Trump has faced over his use of music during campaigns, with other artists and estates—including the White Stripes and Isaac Hayes’ estate—taking similar action against him.
Further Resources
Tags: Litigation, Copyright, Settlement
AEG Resumes $5M Lawsuit Against Young Thug Over Touring Deal
November 20, 2024
AEG is moving forward with a lawsuit seeking over $5 million from Young Thug for allegedly breaching a 2017 exclusive touring agreement. The case, paused for years due to Thug’s criminal trial, accuses the rapper of performing outside the deal and failing to repay a $5.3 million advance.
AEG claims the debt is secured by Thug’s song copyrights, which were used as collateral, and is now exploring options to claim an interest in his music revenue. Adding complexity, AEG says it learned that Thug sold over 400 copyrighted songs for $16 million in 2021, after the lawsuit was filed. The company is investigating the sale, alleging it may have been fraudulent.
With Thug recently released on probation after his criminal trial, AEG and the rapper’s legal team have agreed to a six-month extension on case deadlines to allow Thug time to reacclimate and for AEG to continue its investigation into the copyrights.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Tour, Live Performance
Sony Music Settles Lawsuit Over Unpaid Whitney Houston Songs Used in Biopic
November 19, 2024
Sony Music has reached a settlement in a lawsuit alleging that producers of the 2022 biopic Whitney Houston: I Wanna Dance With Somebody failed to pay for the use of Houston’s iconic songs, including
“I Will Always Love You” and “I’m Every Woman.” Filed in February 2023, the lawsuit claimed that producers Anthem Films and Black Label Media had signed sync licensing agreements just days before the movie’s release but never paid the agreed-upon fees to Sony.
The lawsuit alleged that the producers delayed payment, citing a pending Massachusetts state tax credit. Sony stated that by August 2023—over a year after the film’s release—the funds had still not been paid. The label argued that the use of Houston’s music was critical for a biopic about her life, making the non-payment a serious breach.
The biopic, released in December 2022, grossed $59.8 million globally, a disappointing performance compared to other music biopics like Bohemian Rhapsody and Elvis. The lawsuit added to the film’s woes, asserting that Anthem’s failure to pay meant the producers had no license or authorization to use Houston’s music in the first place.
In a motion filed in Central District of California Sony’s attorneys stated that the case would be dropped voluntarily following the settlement. Details of the agreement remain confidential, with neither party commenting publicly.
The settlement resolves Sony’s claims that the film unlawfully featured “some of the most iconic and popular sound recordings of all time,” highlighting the importance of proper licensing and payment in the creation of musical biopics.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
Rapper Kayne West Sued Over Alleged Unlicensed Sample in “Vultures 1”
November 14, 2024
Kanye West (Ye) faces a new copyright infringement lawsuit from Memphis rappers Criminal Manne, DJ Squeeky, and the estate of Kilo G, accusing him of using unlicensed samples from their 1994 track “Drink a Yak (Part 2)” in his 2024 song “Fuk Sumn,” a collaboration with Ty Dolla $ign. The lawsuit claims the sampling is “blatant” and “brazen,” with lyrics allegedly lifted directly from the original song, such as “smokin on a junt” and “Stop off at the liquor store, get your yak.”
The plaintiffs allege that Ye’s team initially reached out in February to clear the sample but failed to finalize a license after extended negotiations, further complicated by reports that Ye fired his entire legal team mid-discussions. Despite this, the song has garnered over 150 million Spotify streams.
This case is the latest in over a dozen copyright lawsuits Ye has faced, with nine filed since 2019 alone. Most recently, he settled a high-profile dispute with Donna Summer’s estate earlier this year.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
Megadeth’s Dave Mustaine Settles Manager’s Lawsuit for $1.4 Million While Pursuing Counterclaims
November 13, 2024
Dave Mustaine and Megadeth have agreed to pay $1.4 million to settle a lawsuit filed by their former manager, Cory Brennan, and Five B Artist Management. Brennan alleged he was abruptly fired in early 2023, owed over $1 million in unpaid commissions after nearly a decade of managing the band. Brennan’s attorney stated that the manager had helped resurrect Mustaine’s career, leading to Grammy success, hit albums, and a return to large-scale touring, only to be replaced without warning to benefit Mustaine’s son’s budding management career.
However, the settlement does not end the dispute entirely. Mustaine’s counterclaims, accusing Brennan of “repeated management failures” that harmed the band’s reputation and Mustaine’s physical health, remain active and will proceed to trial. Both sides have spent months in discovery without any rulings on the merits of their claims.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
UMG Defends Mary J. Blige’s “Real Love” in Copyright Dispute Over Alleged Funk Sample
November 13, 2024
Universal Music Group (UMG) has asked a federal judge to dismiss a copyright lawsuit alleging that Mary J. Blige’s 1992 hit “Real Love” used an unlicensed sample from the Honey Drippers’ 1973 track “Impeach the President.” Filed earlier this year by Tuff City Records in the Southern District of New York, the lawsuit claims that “Real Love” unlawfully borrowed elements from the famous funk song, which has been widely sampled in hip-hop history. UMG argues that the lawsuit lacks merit, stating the two songs “sound nothing alike” and that Tuff City failed to demonstrate substantial similarity, a key requirement in copyright disputes.
UMG also addressed Tuff City’s claim that a previous settlement involving UMG Recordings over the “Impeach” sound recording implies infringement of the composition. UMG refuted this, emphasizing the legal distinction between sound recording and composition copyrights, arguing that one can infringe without the other.
Tuff City, known for its extensive litigation over music samples, has pursued similar cases against major artists and labels, some of which resulted in settlements or rulings in its favor. However, UMG cited a 2014 case dismissal where a judge criticized Tuff City for assuming every form of copying constitutes infringement. UMG claims the current lawsuit repeats the same flaws and urges dismissal.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
GEMA Sues OpenAI Over Use of Song Lyrics in a Landmark Case for AI and Copyright
November 13, 2024
German performing rights organization (PRO) GEMA has filed a groundbreaking lawsuit against OpenAI in Munich I Regional Court, accusing the AI company of using song lyrics without permission. This is the first lawsuit of its kind brought by a PRO and focuses exclusively on lyrics, not recordings. GEMA alleges that OpenAI trained its generative AI software on copyrighted lyrics and then made them available to users without obtaining licenses, violating European copyright laws related to reproduction and making content publicly available.
Unlike the U.S., where fair use could potentially protect AI training practices, European law offers fewer exceptions for such usage, and GEMA has explicitly opted out of allowing text and data mining for the works it licenses. The lawsuit is backed by major German songwriters and publishers, with GEMA CEO Tobias Holzmüller emphasizing that copyrighted material cannot be treated as free raw material for AI business models. GEMA has also developed a licensing framework for generative AI software and has demanded that AI companies acquire proper licenses.
This case follows a global trend of increasing scrutiny of AI’s use of creative works. OpenAI is already facing lawsuits in the U.S. over similar issues, including cases brought by authors, publishers, and media companies. The outcome of this lawsuit could significantly impact AI copyright law in Europe, offering clarity where uncertainty has persisted.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright, AI
Rock Band The White Stripes Drops Copyright Lawsuit Against Donald Trump Over Use of “Seven Nation Army”
November 11, 2024
The rock band, The White Stripes, have voluntarily dismissed their copyright lawsuit against Donald Trump, which accused his campaign of unauthorized use of their iconic track “Seven Nation Army” in a social media video. The case, filed in September 2024, argued that the use of the song misrepresented the band’s views and associated them with Trump’s policies, which they strongly oppose.
The dismissal, filed shortly after Trump’s election victory, was filed without prejudice. While the filing offered no explanation, it is likely the decision was influenced by the high costs and lengthy timeline of federal copyright litigation, as well as the diminished relevance of the claim now that the election has ended.
Legal experts note that the lawsuit could have proceeded despite Trump’s new role as president, targeting his campaign or staff involved in the video’s distribution. However, pursuing damages or an injunction may no longer have been seen as worthwhile by the band.
This case is one of several copyright disputes involving Trump’s use of music in political campaigns. Ongoing lawsuits include a case filed by the estate of Isaac Hayes over “Hold On, I’m Coming” and a separate case from Eddy Grant over “Electric Avenue,” in which a judge has already ruled Trump liable for infringement.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Dismissal, Copyright
Federal Prosecutors Use Lil Durk’s Lyrics as Evidence in Expanded Murder-for-Hire Case
November 8, 2024
Federal prosecutors have cited lyrics from Lil Durk’s 2022 song “Wonderful Wayne & Jackie Boy” as evidence in an expanded indictment accusing the rapper of orchestrating a 2022 shooting targeting rapper Quando Rondo. The attack, which occurred at a Los Angeles gas station, left Rondo unharmed but resulted in the death of his friend Lul Pab.
The updated indictment adds two new felony charges against Durk, including another murder-for-hire count and a firearms charge, in addition to consolidating his case with charges against alleged members of his Only The Family (OTF) crew and other associates.
Prosecutors allege that Durk used the lyrics of his song to “commercialize” the crime and referenced a news clip of Rondo’s reaction to Lul Pab’s death. The lyrics reportedly include the line: “Look on the news and see your son / You screamin’, ‘No, no.’”
The indictment claims Durk’s OTF group is a “hybrid organization” functioning as both a music collective and a criminal gang, with acts of violence allegedly carried out under Durk’s direction. Prosecutors assert that the attack on Rondo was retaliation for the 2020 killing of rapper King Von, a close friend of Durk’s, and allege that Durk financed the operation. If convicted on all charges, Lil Durk faces a potential life sentence.
This case is another high-profile example of a rapper’s lyrics being admitted as evidence against them in a criminal case. See our posts on the RAP Act below.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Criminal Justice, RAP Act
Rapper Plies Sues Rappers Megan Thee Stallion, GloRilla, and Others Over Alleged Copyright Infringement in “Wanna Be”
November 7, 2024
Rapper Plies has filed a lawsuit against rappers Megan Thee Stallion, GloRilla, Cardi B, and Soulja Boy, alleging that their song “Wanna Be” unlawfully incorporates elements of his 2008 track “Me & My Goons.” The suit claims that “Wanna Be” samples Soulja Boy’s 2010 hit “Pretty Boy Swag,” which itself allegedly includes unauthorized material from Plies’ song. Filed in the U.S. court for the Central District of California, the lawsuit names not only the artists but also the labels and companies associated with the track.
“Wanna Be,” released in April 2024, debuted at No. 11 on the Billboard Hot 100 and later featured a remix with Cardi B. The song prominently samples “Pretty Boy Swag,” which spent 16 weeks on the chart in 2010. Plies alleges that while Soulja Boy cleared the sample for Megan and GloRilla’s use, the underlying material from “Me & My Goons” was not properly licensed.
Further Resources:
- Billboard
- Docket
- Complaint
- “Wanna Be” GloRilla, Megan Thee Stallion
- “Me & My Goons” Plies
- “Pretty Boy Swag” Soulja Boy Tell’em
Tags: Litigation, Copyright
UMG, ABKCO, and Concord Sue TuneCore Over Alleged Copyright Infringement of Major Artists’ Recordings
November 4, 2024
Universal Music Group (UMG), ABKCO, and Concord have filed a $500 million lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against TuneCore and its parent company Believe, accusing them of enabling “massive ongoing infringements” of copyrighted works by artists like Rihanna, Ariana Grande, Justin Bieber, and Kendrick Lamar. The lawsuit alleges that TuneCore is riddled with fraudulent uploads, including altered or misspelled versions of popular tracks, and accuses the company of exploiting YouTube’s content management system to delay rightful royalty payments. Plaintiffs claim Believe’s business model relies on piracy to fuel growth, labeling the company as “overrun with fraudulent ‘artists’ and pirate record labels.”
The lawsuit specifically cites unauthorized content being distributed to streaming platforms and social media, exploiting a “wild west” digital ecosystem. Believe has denied the claims, asserting its commitment to copyright compliance. UMG’s statement condemned Believe’s practices as harmful to both major and independent artists, claiming the company prioritizes rapid growth at the expense of legitimate creators.
Fraudulent and infringing content remains a contentious issue as the music industry becomes increasingly democratized, allowing easier uploads by individuals. Despite TuneCore’s efforts to address fraud through initiatives like the “Music Fights Fraud” coalition, the company has faced similar lawsuits in the past, including a 2020 case by Round Hill Music.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright, Licenses
Ed Sheeran Wins Appeal in “Thinking Out Loud” Copyright Case
November 1, 2024
Ed Sheeran’s hit Thinking Out Loud did not infringe the copyright of Marvin Gaye and Ed Townsend’s Let’s Get It On, according to a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. This decision follows Sheeran’s earlier victory in a separate lawsuit brought by Townsend’s heirs, which was resolved at trial in his favor.
While the previous case involved a claim filed by Townsend’s family, this appeal was filed by Structured Asset Sales (SAS), a company that owns a stake in Let’s Get It On. The Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of SAS’s case, ruling that the songs only share fundamental musical elements—such as a common chord progression and rhythmic patterns—that are too basic to be copyrighted. The court reiterated that granting protection to such elements could stifle musical creativity. Additionally, it noted that Thinking Out Loud does not share melody or lyrics with Let’s Get It On.
By upholding the trial court’s decision, the Second Circuit has reinforced a legal precedent that limits copyright protection for basic musical building blocks, providing clarity for future music copyright disputes.
Further Resources:
Tags: Litigation, Copyright