{"id":3917,"date":"2025-01-28T20:39:05","date_gmt":"2025-01-28T20:39:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/limp-bizkit-ruling-drake-v-umg-lawyers-more-music-law-news\/"},"modified":"2025-01-28T20:39:05","modified_gmt":"2025-01-28T20:39:05","slug":"limp-bizkit-ruling-drake-v-umg-lawyers-more-music-law-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/limp-bizkit-ruling-drake-v-umg-lawyers-more-music-law-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Limp Bizkit Ruling, Drake v. UMG Lawyers & More Music Law News"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tThis is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from <\/em>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 suffers a setback in its $200 million lawsuit against Universal Music Group; A$AP Rocky\u2019s assault trial kicks off in Los Angeles; a deep-dive into the legal teams representing Drake and UMG in their legal battle over Kendrick Lamar\u2019s diss track; and much more.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n\t\tTHE BIG STORY: Limp Bizkit\u2019s UMG Lawsuit Hits A Snag\t<\/h2>\n

\n\tA lawsuit from Limp Bizkit says Universal Music Group (UMG) used \u201csystemic\u201d and \u201cfraudulent\u201d policies to deprive the band of millions in royalties. But a judge ruled last week that there was a big legal flaw in the blockbuster case.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe lawsuit, filed last year and seeking $200 million in damages, claims that frontman Fred Durst and the band have \u201cnot seen a dime in royalties\u201d due to \u201cfraudulent\u201d policies by UMG. The lawsuit argued the label\u2019s conduct was so egregious that the band was entitled to \u201crescission\u201d \u2014 a legal term for a ruling that would void its entire decades-long deal with UMG.<\/p>\n

\n\tRescission is not Limp Bizkit\u2019s only legal angle, but it\u2019s crucial to the band\u2019s case. Without it, the group can\u2019t pursue its separate allegations of copyright infringement \u2014 claims that would carry a huge damages award if proven. Such a claim could only succeed if the band\u2019s contracts are voided and it legally regains its ownership of the copyrights.<\/p>\n

\n\tIt turns out Friday (Jan. 24) was just one of those days. In a ruling on UMG\u2019s motion to dismiss the case, Judge Percy Anderson rejected the rescission claim \u2014 noting that, despite the band\u2019s claim to have never been paid, it had in fact been \u201cpaid millions in advances\u201d and that UMG had fronted \u201csubstantial sums\u201d to produce its albums.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cPlaintiffs seek rescission of contracts that have governed the parties\u2019 relationship beginning in 1996 \u2014 nearly 30 years \u2014 [but] plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged the type of \u2018substantial\u2019 or \u2018total failure\u2019 in the performance of the contracts that could support rescission,\u201d the judge wrote.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe ruling isn\u2019t a total defeat. Judge Anderson didn\u2019t reach conclusions on many of the lawsuit\u2019s other legal claims, including fraudulent concealment and intentional misrepresentation, and gave Limp Bizkit\u2019s lawyers a chance to fix the rescission claim. But the judge\u2019s wording suggested he will be skeptical of revoking a contract when \u201cmillions in royalties were advanced and paid under decades-old agreements.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tFollowing Friday\u2019s decision, Limp Bizkit has until early next month to refile an amended version of the lawsuit. We\u2019ll keep you posted at Billboard <\/em>when they do so.<\/p>\n

\n\t\tOther top stories this week\u2026\t<\/h2>\n

\n\tA$AP SHOOTING TRIAL<\/strong> \u2013 A criminal trial in Los Angeles kicked off for rapper A$AP Rocky over accusations that he fired a gun at former friend A$AP Relli on a Hollywood street in 2021. The star (Rakim Meyers), charged with two felony counts of assault with a firearm, faces 24 years in prison if convicted after turning down a plea deal for just 180 days in county jail. In opening statements, prosecutors told jurors Rocky fired a 9mm pistol and revealed that they had recovered a loaded magazine from such a gun during a search of his home. Defense attorneys responded by arguing that Rocky carried only a \u201cprop gun\u201d and had fired it as a warning to \u201cscare\u201d Relli because he was attacking another A$AP crew member. Stay tuned: Rihanna, Rocky\u2019s wife, is expected to appear in court on Wednesday (Jan. 29).<\/p>\n

\n\tLAWYER UP <\/strong>\u2013 With Drake\u2019s lawsuit against UMG over Kendrick Lamar\u2019s diss track \u201cNot Like Us\u201d still in the earliest stages, I wrote a deep-dive on the high-powered legal teams each side has hired. For Drake, that meant turning to a veteran litigator who has made a name for himself representing the alleged victims of conspiracy theories on the internet. For UMG, it meant hiring one of the biggest law firms in the world \u2014 and one that the music giant has repeatedly used in major cases over the years.<\/p>\n

\n\tMICHAEL MOVIE DELAY <\/strong>\u2013 An upcoming Michael Jackson biopic has been delayed for months due to a recently revealed, decades-old legal agreement that will require costly re-shoots of key scenes. First reported last week by the news site Puck<\/em>, the agreement barred any portrayal of the family of Jordan Chandler, a then-13-year-old boy who accused the superstar singer of molestation in the 1990s \u2014 but the movie featured the family prominently anyway. A source with knowledge of the film\u2019s production told Billboard<\/em> that re-shoots are already scheduled and that the movie\u2019s ultimate release \u2014 now scheduled for October \u2014 is not in jeopardy.<\/p>\n

\n\tTHERE GOES GRAVITY<\/strong> \u2013 Eight Mile Style, the publishing company that owns the copyrights to Eminem\u2019s \u201cLose Yourself,\u201d filed an infringement lawsuit against a Ford dealership near the rapper\u2019s native Detroit, accusing the company of using the iconic track in TikTok videos that warned viewers they \u201conly get one shot\u201d to buy a special edition truck. The case is just the latest over social media videos allegedly featuring uncleared music \u2014 a problem that has recently led to litigation against Chili\u2019s, Marriott and a slew of NBA teams.<\/p>\n

\n\tSPEIDI SUIT<\/strong> \u2013 Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag joined more than 20 other property owners in suing the city of Los Angeles over the recent devastating fires in Southern California. Attorneys for Montag \u2014 whose 2010 album recently re-charted after going viral \u2014 claim the city\u2019s decision to \u201cdrain\u201d a local reservoir left firefighters without enough water to battle the blaze effectively.<\/p>\n

\n\tCHRIS BROWN SUES <\/strong>\u2013 The R&B star filed a defamation case against Warner Bros. Discovery over a 2024 documentary claiming he had a long history of sexually abusing women. Brown\u2019s attorneys say Warner\u2019s ID network released the movie in \u201ctheir pursuit of likes, clicks, downloads and dollars\u201d even though they knew it contained false and damaging claims about him: \u201cThey did so after being provided proof that their information was false.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tROCK & ROLL FAIR USE <\/strong>\u2013 The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame asked a federal judge to dismiss a copyright lawsuit over an image of Eddie Van Halen snapped by Neil Zlozower, a prolific rock photographer who has filed dozens of such cases in recent years. In seeking to toss the case, the Rock Hall argued that it made legal \u201cfair use\u201d of the Van Halen pic, saying it was part of a museum exhibit designed to \u201ceducate the public about the history of rock and roll music.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tMANSON NOT CHARGED <\/strong>\u2013 Los Angeles prosecutors announced that Marilyn Manson (Brian Warner) won\u2019t face criminal charges following a four-year investigation into allegations of domestic violence and sexual assault. The city\u2019s newly-elected DA praised the \u201ccourage and resilience of the women who came forward,\u201d but said that the statute of limitations had expired for any domestic violence charges against the rocker and that his office simply could not prove a sexual assault charge in court.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cBRAZEN THIEVERY\u201d <\/strong>\u2013 Independent label and publisher Artist Partner Group (APG) filed a copyright lawsuit against Create Music Group, claiming that the digital distributor uploaded and monetized songs on YouTube that it didn\u2019t actually own. \u201cCreate\u2019s \u2018business model\u2019 is to steal the intellectual property and contractual rights of innocent rightsholders,\u201d APG\u2019s attorneys wrote.<\/p>\n

\n\tDIDDY DEFAMATION<\/strong> \u2013 Sean \u201cDiddy\u201d Combs lodged a defamation lawsuit over allegations that a man named Courtney Burgess falsely claimed to have videos of the embattled hip-hop mogul committing sexual assault. The lawsuit, which also names Burgess\u2019 attorney Ariel Mitchell<\/strong> as a defendant, claims the fake reports about the videos caused him \u201cprofound reputational and economic injury and severe prejudice\u201d ahead of his looming criminal trial on sex trafficking and racketeering charges.<\/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":3918,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[3765,441,153,7,3764,593,310,686,1109],"class_list":["post-3917","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-bizkit","tag-drake","tag-law","tag-lawyers","tag-limp","tag-music","tag-news","tag-ruling","tag-umg"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3917","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=3917"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3917\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3918"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3917"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3917"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3917"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}