{"id":3017,"date":"2024-10-15T18:29:19","date_gmt":"2024-10-15T18:29:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/limp-bizkit-lawsuit-nelly-case-barry-white-sample-more-legal-news\/"},"modified":"2024-10-15T18:29:19","modified_gmt":"2024-10-15T18:29:19","slug":"limp-bizkit-lawsuit-nelly-case-barry-white-sample-more-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/limp-bizkit-lawsuit-nelly-case-barry-white-sample-more-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Limp Bizkit Lawsuit, Nelly Case, Barry White Sample & More Legal News"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tThis 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.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n\tThis week: Limp Bizkit sues Universal Music Group for $200 million over claims that the band has \u2018never\u2019 been paid royalties; a lawsuit against Nelly takes a twist as his former bandmates allegedly push back on the case; Barry White\u2019s estate files a lawsuit over Future and Metro Boomin\u2019s chart-topper \u201cLike That\u201d; and much more.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n\t\tTHE BIG STORY: Has Limp Bizkit Really <\/em>Never Gotten Royalties?<\/strong>\t<\/h2>\n

\n\tAt one point in the bombshell, $200 million lawsuit Limp Bizkit<\/a> filed against Universal Music Group last week, the band\u2019s attorneys explicitly asked the question that everyone was thinking as they read the case: \u201cThe band had still not been paid a single cent by UMG in any royalties until taking action against UMG, leading one to ask how on earth that could possibly be true.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tHow on earth, indeed. How had one of the biggest bands of its era, which sold millions of records during the music industry\u2019s MTV-fueled, turn-of-the-century glory days, still never<\/em> have been paid any royalties nearly three decades later?<\/p>\n

\n\tAccording to Limp Bizkit and frontman Fred Durst<\/strong>, the answer is an \u201cappalling and unsettling\u201d scheme by UMG centered on \u201csystemic\u201d and \u201cfraudulent\u201d policies that were \u201cdeliberately designed\u201d to conceal royalties from artists and \u201ckeep those profits for itself.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tScathing language aside, the lawsuit really appears to be a long-delayed dispute over recoupment.<\/p>\n

\n\tDurst says that UMG repeatedly told him that Limp remained unrecouped \u2014 meaning its royalties still had not surpassed the amount the group had been paid in upfront advances. UMG allegedly told Durst that it had paid out a whopping $43 million in advances over the years, a huge figure that would go a long way to explaining the lack of royalties.<\/p>\n

\n\tLimp Bizkit\u2019s lawsuit says UMG didn\u2019t provide \u201cany back-up for this alleged amount\u201d \u2013 and that the label essentially kept<\/em> the band in the red with shady bookkeeping, including \u201cintentionally concealing the true amount of sales\u201d and \u201cfraudulent accounting practices.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cWhere did this additional $199,676.00 charged to the account come from?\u201d the band\u2019s lawyers wrote at one point, referring to one such alleged inconsistency. \u201cIt seems to have come out of thin air to overdraft Limp Bizkit\u2019s due and payable account in order to defraud Limp Bizkit and show an unrecouped account.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tUMG has not yet publicly commented on the allegations, so we\u2019ll keep you updated when the music giant files its first formal response in court\u2026<\/p>\n

\n\t\tOther top stories this week\u2026<\/strong>\t<\/h3>\n

\n\tALWAYS MORE DIDDY <\/strong>\u2013 Since you last heard from Legal Beat <\/em>one whole week ago, there have somehow already been four big developments in the story of Sean \u201cDiddy<\/a>\u201d Combs, who stands accused of decades of sexual abuse. Here goes:<\/p>\n

\n\t-Attorneys for the rapper filed their opening salvo in an appeal of a ruling denying him pre-trial release on bail, arguing the \u201csensationalism\u201d of the case led the judge to keep him locked up over \u201cpurely speculative\u201d concerns about witness intimidation. In the days since, the appeals court has already declined to issue a quick ruling releasing him; instead, the court will hear the case at normal pace and rule at some point in the next few months on whether he should be set free until trial.<\/p>\n

\n\t-Less than a day after filing the appeal, Combs\u2019s team accused the government of leaking evidence to the media in order to \u201ctaint the jury pool and deprive Mr. Combs of his right to a fair trial.\u201d Among other evidence allegedly shared with the press? The infamous surveillance video of Combs assaulting then-girlfriend Cassie in 2016, which his lawyers say was leaked \u201cto mortally wound the reputation and the prospect of Sean Combs successfully defending himself.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t-The judge set a May 5 date for the start of Combs\u2019 criminal trial, in which he will face charges of racketeering and sex trafficking over what prosecutors say was a sprawling criminal operation aimed at satisfying his need for \u201csexual gratification.\u201d The schedule could still be pushed back, particularly if prosecutors file new charges or add defendants to the case, or if Combs eventually gets released on bail and chooses to waive his \u201cspeedy trial\u201d right.<\/p>\n

\n\t-Six new civil lawsuits were filed in Manhattan federal court, including one from a man who says he was sexually assaulted by Combs in 1998 when he was 16 years old and attending one of the rapper\u2019s famed \u201cwhite parties\u201d in the Hamptons. The cases were the first in a wave of dozens of civil cases that are expected to be filed in the weeks ahead by Los Angeles attorney Andrew Van Arsdale<\/strong> and Texas attorney Tony Buzbee<\/strong>, who earlier this month said they are representing at least 120 such alleged victims.<\/p>\n

\n\tST. LUNATICS REBEL <\/strong>\u2013 Weeks after Nelly<\/a>\u2019s former St. Lunatics groupmates sued him for allegedly cutting them out of royalties, an attorney for the star claimed that three of them had never approved the lawsuit in the first place. In a letter sent last month, Nelly\u2019s attorney warned the lawyer who filed the case last month that Murphy Lee (Tohri Harper), Kyjuan (Robert Kyjuan) and City Spud (Lavell Webb) had recently retained his services and had \u201cinformed me that they did not authorize you to include them as plaintiffs\u201d and were \u201cdemanding you remove their names\u201d from the case.<\/p>\n

\n\tDR. DRE\u2019S DR. DRAMA <\/strong>\u2013 Dr. Dre<\/a> was hit with a lawsuit accusing him a waging a \u201cmalicious campaign of harassment\u201d against a psychiatrist served as a marriage counselor and mediator for the rapper and his now-ex-wife Nicole Young<\/strong>. Dr. Charles J. Sophy<\/strong> says the rapper subjected him to a \u201cbarrage of threats\u201d via text message, and even sent fake FBI agents to his home to intimidate him. Dre\u2019s attorneys quickly fired back, saying Sophy only sued because Dre is currently seeking to have his medical license revoked over allegations of \u201cdereliction of duties and incredible incompetence\u201d during the divorce.<\/p>\n

\n\tSAMPLE SPAT <\/strong>\u2013 Barry White<\/a>\u2019s estate filed a copyright lawsuit over allegations that a prominent sample at the heart of Future<\/a> and Metro Boomin<\/a>\u2019s chart-topping \u201cLike That\u201d infringes the rights to a 1973 song by the legendary singer \u2014 but they didn\u2019t actually file the case against those stars. Instead, they sued duo Rodney-O<\/strong> (Rodney Oliver) & Joe Cooley<\/strong>, the classic hip hop duo behind \u201cEverlasting Bass,\u201d the track that Future and Metro Boomin sampled.<\/p>\n

\n\tNAME BLAME<\/strong> \u2013 Attorneys for Garth Brooks<\/a> publicly disclosed the name of a woman who sued the country star for sexual assault, naming her as a defendant in a lawsuit that accuses the woman of extortion and defamation. The move drew a sharp rebuke from the woman\u2019s lawyers, who said Brooks had \u201cpublicly named a rape victim\u201d in order to \u201cpunish\u201d her for speaking out.<\/p>\n

\n\tTHE CASE ISN\u2019T ALRIGHT<\/strong> \u2013 A California appeals court sided with The Offspring in a long-running court case filed by former drummer Ron Welty<\/strong>, rejecting his claims that he was owed millions more from the punk band\u2019s $35 million catalog sale to Round Hill Music. A Los Angeles judge rejected those accusations last year, and California\u2019s Court of Appeals ruled that there had been \u201cno reversible error\u201d in that decision.<\/p>\n

\n\tI WANT MY ROYALTIES BACK, ROYALTIES BACK<\/strong> \u2013 What\u2019s going on in the Chili\u2019s legal department? For the second time this year, the huge restaurant chain was sued over accusations that it used copyrighted music on social media without permission \u2014 this time by Universal Music Group over dozens songs by Ariana Grande<\/a>, Justin Bieber<\/a> and other stars. The new case came shortly after the advertising-averse Beastie Boys<\/a> sued Chili\u2019s over the same thing back in July.<\/p>\n

\n\tTAKING THE STAND <\/strong>\u2013 Amid a lawsuit claiming Martin Shkreli<\/strong> might leak copies of Wu-Tang Clan<\/a>\u2019s ultra-rare album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin<\/em>, a federal judge ruled that the pharma exec must personally go to court and testify under oath about the fate of the album. Shkreli once owned the album, but was forced to forfeit to federal prosecutors after he was convicted of securities fraud.<\/p>\n

\n\tYE LAWSUIT UPDATE <\/strong>\u2013 Ye (formerly Kanye West) was sued by Lauren Pisciotta, a former assistant who claimed that the rapper drugged and sexually assaulted her during a studio session he co-hosted with Diddy. Pisciotta already sued Ye in July for sexual harassment, breach of contract and wrongful termination, but she filed an updated version of the case that includes the Diddy-linked claims.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3018,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[2945,3765,294,303,136,3764,3487,310,1307,1257],"class_list":["post-3017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-barry","tag-bizkit","tag-case","tag-lawsuit","tag-legal","tag-limp","tag-nelly","tag-news","tag-sample","tag-white"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3017","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=3017"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3017\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3018"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}