{"id":11120,"date":"2026-07-11T18:42:02","date_gmt":"2026-07-11T18:42:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/bad-bunnys-ex-can-move-forward-with-un-verano-sin-ti-song-lawsuit\/"},"modified":"2026-07-11T18:42:02","modified_gmt":"2026-07-11T18:42:02","slug":"bad-bunnys-ex-can-move-forward-with-un-verano-sin-ti-song-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/bad-bunnys-ex-can-move-forward-with-un-verano-sin-ti-song-lawsuit\/","title":{"rendered":"Bad Bunny’s Ex Can Move Forward With \u2018Un Verano Sin Ti\u2019 Song Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tThe Supreme Court of Puerto Rico has ruled that Bad Bunny\u2019s ex-girlfriend can continue suing the star for allegedly featuring her voice saying the phrase \u201cBad Bunny baby\u201d on the chart-topping album Un Verano Sin Ti <\/em>without permission.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a Wednesday (July 8) ruling, obtained by Billboard <\/em>and translated from Spanish by the service DeepL, a majority of justices on the island\u2019s highest court upheld a series of previous rulings that sustained Carliz De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez\u2019s claims over the use of her voice on the 2022 song \u201cDos Mil 16\u201d. However, the court said De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez waited too long to sue over the same vocal sample on Bad Bunny\u2019s 2015 track \u201cPa Ti,\u201d and these claims are barred by the statute of limitations. The lawsuit will now move forward as to \u201cDos Mil 16\u201d only.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tDe La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez dated Bad Bunny (Benito Martinez Ocasio) on and off for several years beginning in 2011, and in 2015 she recorded a voice memo saying the tagline \u201cBad Bunny baby\u201d at his request. She sued the singer and his label, Rimas Entertainment, in 2023, alleging she had not given permission or gotten proper financial compensation for the use of this recording on his songs.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe lawsuit\u2019s key claims are brought under Puerto Rico\u2019s right of publicity law. Just like in many other U.S. jurisdictions, this statute protects an individual\u2019s voice from being used without their consent in a commercial setting. Traditionally, this has meant that people can only sue over the use of their voices in advertisements, and sound recordings are exempt.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn this specific case, however, a Puerto Rico judge ruled in 2024 that De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez\u2019s voice on \u201cDos Mil 16\u201d was actually a form of advertising. That\u2019s because, according to the judge, the sample\u2019s circulation on social media fueled fan speculation about whether Un Verano Sin Ti <\/em>would explore De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez and Bad Bunny\u2019s romantic relationship, thus driving album sales.<\/p>\n

\n\tThis finding was upheld in an initial appeal last year. On Wednesday (July 8), Puerto Rico\u2019s Supreme Court agreed as well that the various lower courts got it right when they declined to dismiss De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez\u2019s right of publicity claims: \u201cThey did not err in determining that the facts presented regarding the commercial or business exploitation of Ms. De la Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez\u2019s voice were sufficient to draw attention to the product in question or to inform the public about it through the media,\u201d wrote Justice Mildred G. Pab\u00f3n Charneco for the majority.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn addition to these claims over the use of her voice, De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez will also be allowed to keep pursuing copyright claims against Bad Bunny for allegedly infringing her rights to the \u201cBad Bunny baby\u201d voice memo. This part of the lawsuit was dismissed in 2024, but the Supreme Court majority revived it on Wednesday after finding that the recording was potentially copyrightable.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cTo the extent that such a performance using her voice is fixed in a tangible medium, we recognize that copyright may arise in the recording,\u201d wrote Justice Pab\u00f3n Charneco. \u201cMs. De la Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez alleged in her complaint that the recording of her personal, distinctive and incomparable rendition of the phrase was misused and that it was used without proper attribution. Therefore, we conclude that the plaintiff has presented sufficient facts to eventually offer evidence justifying this claim.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tNot all the justices on Puerto Rico\u2019s top court agreed with these findings. Justice Angel Col\u00f3n P\u00e9rez filed a dissent saying he and other justices would have dismissed both the copyright and right of publicity claims against Bad Bunny: \u201cIt seems clear to us that, in the context of the present litigation, none of the causes of action invoked by Ms. De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez is legally valid under any [law] available in our jurisdiction,\u201d wrote Justice Col\u00f3n P\u00e9rez.<\/p>\n

\n\tReps for both De La Cruz Hern\u00e1ndez and Bad Bunny did not immediately return requests for comment on the decision on Friday (July 10).<\/p>\n


\"Billboard
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico has ruled that Bad Bunny\u2019s ex-girlfriend can continue suing the star for allegedly featuring her voice saying the phrase \u201cBad Bunny baby\u201d […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11121,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[784,5068,303,922,5868,986,5867],"class_list":["post-11120","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-bad","tag-bunnys","tag-lawsuit","tag-move","tag-sin","tag-song","tag-verano"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11120","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11120"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11120\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11121"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11120"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11120"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11120"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}