ARTY brings lawsuit against Marshmello for allegedly plagiarizing ‘Happier’

This post was originally published on this site

ARTY brings lawsuit against Marshmello for allegedly plagiarizing ‘Happier’Marshmello Cred CINDY ORDGETTY IMAGES

Veteran electronic producer ARTY is suing Marshmello, claiming one of the masked producer’s biggest hits, the Bastille-assisted “Happier,” is actually plagiarized. The terms of the suit claim that Marshmello and Bastille used remixed elements of ARTY’s 2014 remix of “I Lived” by OneRepublic.

This particular lawsuit is unique, in that the legal dispute is mainly anchored to the song’s beat and other components, as opposed to the underlying composition. While ARTY’s remix was an undoubted success in 2014, “Happier” managed to claim the top spot on the dance music charts for 31 consecutive weeks in 2018, and grab a double-platinum certification as a result.

According to The Tennessean, the publication that broke the story, ARTY and Marshmello’s shared music publisher, Kobalt Music, as well as
Daniel Campbell Smith, co-founder of Bastille, are named as co-defendants in the suit. Upon inspection of the two songs, both drops share suspiciously similar arrangements, and Redditors were even quick to point out the similarity months before the lawsuit was officially brought to court.

ARTY brings lawsuit against Marshmello for allegedly plagiarizing ‘Happier’Image 1

Hear both songs below. You be the judge.

Via: The Tennessean

Coachella prevails in radius clause lawsuit

This post was originally published on this site

Coachella prevails in radius clause lawsuitCoachella Rukes2

Coachella‘s legal battle with the Oregon promoters behind Soul’d Out Festival has come to an end. The skirmish between Soul’d Out, and Coachella parent company Goldenvoice, commenced in May of 2018 when one decided to sue the other. Right in time for the 2019 edition in April, however, a judge has thrown out the lawsuit.

The source of contention in this case was Coachella’s notoriously strict radius clause, which stipulates that artists performing the fest can’t perform in surrounding states (including Oregon) or counties from December until May—among other stringent items. Lawyers for the Goldenvoice event argued that they were merely protecting the one-of-a-kind experience they give to fans, while Soul’d out argued it hurt artists and surrounding events.

2018 and 2019 have seemed to be the year that megafestivals are put to the test. On the East Coast, Ultra Miami‘s move to the Virginia Key has been a topic of contention since the idea was incepted, with the most recent update involving a case against the City of Miami itself.

 

H/T: Billboard

Photo credit: Rukes

Rapture Electronic Music Festival’s lawsuit against Ultra gets thrown out

This post was originally published on this site

Rapture Electronic Music Festival’s lawsuit against Ultra gets thrown outUltra Music Key Biscayne Resident Backlash

A case of David and Goliath in the festival world has come to an end with the “big guy” on top. Rapture Electronic Music Festival‘s federal lawsuit against Ultra Music Festival (UMF) has been thrown out by a local judge, reports Your EDM. Rapture’s federal lawsuit followed the cease and desist warning that Rapture issued to Ultra in January. The official ruling in the case asserts, “‘[…] the Complaint fails on its face to plausibly allege any unlawful conspiracy or anticompetitive arrangement between Defendants. Plaintiff relies exclusively on conclusory allegations of conspiracy backed by no factual allegations whatsoever.’” Rapture may either amend or formally withdraw the complaint.

Rapture initially cited their possession of a signed, previously arranged agreement to use the Virginia Key land throughout 2020, but more specifically, from March 28-30, 2019, the very same dates that Ultra declared for its 2019 installment. Rapture referenced their application to host their own festival on Virginia Key, dated March 11, 2018. Rapture additionally paid a deposit to use the island from March 28-30. Needless to say, only one of the festivals can occupy Virginia Key.

“We have filed a federal lawsuit that will include an emergency injunction against Ultra, City of Miami and Virginia Key Beach Trust in order to return our location, claiming what is rightfully ours. At this point the future of Rapture at Virginia Key Beach Park is in the Federal judge’s hands. We have full trust in the federal system to obtain a fair judgement,” Rapture stated in a Facebook post. UMF coordinators responded to Rapture’s legal complaint in a press release that proclaims Rapture’s lawsuit to bear “no merit.”

The press release asserts that “Ultra lawfully secured its license to host its annual production on Virginia Key, including by obtaining necessary approvals from the City of Miami Commission.” “We are excited to present our fans with what will be the best and most transformative music festival that we have ever produced by way of music, artists, experience, cutting edge and technologically advanced production elements and novel art installations,” the press release concludes. Ultra’s full-length statement follows below, along with Rapture’s 19-page formal complaint:

FEBRUARY 2, 2019 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

There is no merit to yesterday’s lawsuit. To claim that Ultra has violated the law is both disappointing and misplaced. Ultra lawfully secured its license to host its annual production on Virginia Key, including by obtaining necessary approvals from the City of Miami Commission. We are excited to present our fans with what will be the best and most transformative music festival that we have ever produced by way of music, artists, experience, cutting edge and technologically advanced production elements and novel art installations. We look forward to hosting our 21st edition of the Ultra Music Festival at our new home at Miami Marine Stadium and Historic Virginia Key Beach Park on March 29, 30 and 31, 2019.

H/T: EDM Tunes + Your EDM

Paul van Dyk wins $12 million lawsuit over near-fatal stage fall

This post was originally published on this site

Paul van Dyk wins $12 million lawsuit over near-fatal stage fallPaul Van Dyk Dreamstate

Trance fans watched in horror in February 2016 as longtime legend, Paul van Dyk, suddenly disappeared off the stage in what turned out to be a near-fatal fall at ASOT Utrecht. The event. produced by ALDA and Armin van Buuren’s A State Of Trance team, was immediately cancelled, with van Dyk being airlifted to a nearby hospital. Recovery was a long and arduous process, and sadly, doctors advised the DJ and producer that he’d never be fully recovered from the damage on his body he’d endured that night after falling 10 meters to the ground.

Fast-forward a few years later, and a lawsuit against ALDA has yielded a $12 million award for Paul on account of poor and unsafe stage design. The winnings also included damages for the physical and psychological pain endured since the accident.

Read our more in-depth interview with him on the fall here.

 

H/T: Mixmag

Skrillex ordered to pay $1.6 million to fan allegedly injured in stage dive incident

This post was originally published on this site

Skrillex ordered to pay $1.6 million to fan allegedly injured in stage dive incidentSkrille Stage

Someone was obviously not ready for the ruffneck bass.

After a long legal battle with a fan named Jennifer Fraissl, Skrillex has been ordered to pay the 31-year-old $1.6 million in damages, stemming from a lawsuit filed in 2014 after Fraissl claims to have suffered an injury at a Skrillex show in 2012 at The Belasco in Los Angeles. Fraissl claims the OWSLA head honcho leaped off stage and on top of her, causing her to have a seizure a few days after the incident.

As a result, a jury awarded Fraissl a whopping $4.5 million dollars. Skrillex was found to be 35% responsible for the injury. His touring company, Lost Boys, will also have to come out of pocket to the tune of $1.8 million. The Belasco isn’t off the hook either — the venue owes nearly $450,000 to the plaintiff. Fraissl was found 15% responsible, so she will not collect the entire sum owed.

In a statement following the ruling, Skrillex noted that while he is disappointed in the ruling, his fans and their safety and enjoyment remains his first priority. Says Skrillex,

“There is nothing more important to me than my fans and their safety at my shows — I want them to have fun and enjoy the music.”

The “Agen Wida” producer’s attorney, Barry Thompson told TMZ, “Ms. Fraissl’s active international travel schedule since her stroke seems unlikely for someone who suffered the type of mental and physical damages she and her attorney claimed.” You can see a video of the stage dive incident that caused the alleged injury below.

Ticketmaster hit with class action lawsuit following allegations of ticket scalper collusion

This post was originally published on this site

Ticketmaster hit with class action lawsuit following allegations of ticket scalper collusionTicketmaster

Ticketmaster and parent company Live Nation have been served with a class action lawsuit that accuses Ticketmaster of “actively [encouraging] scalpers to resell event tickets on its site because it collects a fee on both the initial sale and resale.” The lawsuit was filed on September 28 in a California federal court. “Have you ever wondered why Ticketmaster has been unable to rid itself of the scalpers who purchase mass quantities of concert or sports tickets from its website and then resell them for much more minutes later?” the complaint asks, only to provide an answer to the question asked therein: “Ticketmaster hasn’t wanted to rid itself of scalpers because, as it turns out, they have been working with them.”

The accusation that Ticketmaster colluded with ticket scalpers to orchestrate the covert ticket scalping system on its invite-only secondary ticket sale site, TradeDesk, stems from the publication of an investigation jointly conducted by CBC News and the Toronto Star. CBC News and the Toronto Star claimed that two of their undercover journalists posed as scalpers at a live entertainment convention hosted during summer 2018, during which Ticketmaster personnel pitched their “underground professional resale program.” The Ticketmaster staff members present at the convention reportedly told the journalists that there are brokers with “a couple of hundred accounts” on TradeDesk. Ticketmaster representatives allegedly also stated that the multiple accounts are not “something that we look at or report,” despite Ticketmaster’s support of its in-house buyer abuse division designed to probe online ticket sales for suspicious behavior. Ticketmaster has since denied its participation in any scalping related activity.

The class action suit opened against Ticketmaster follows U.S. senators Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Richard Blumenthal’s (D-Con.) request for further details about Ticketmaster‘s alleged oversight of the secret ticket scalping scheme. Moran and Blumenthal penned a letter to the CEO of Live Nation, Michael Rapino, in which the senators ask for clarification on the use of TradeDesk. The issue is of particular interest for the senators, who were instrumental in the institution of the Obama-signed BOTS Act, which limits the use of bots in consumer ticket purchasing. Moran and Blumenthal prompted Rampino to respond to their letter by October 5. Ticketmaster has not issued a formal statement regarding the lawsuit.

H/T: High Snobiety

Former Spotify sales executive sues company for alleged gender discrimination

This post was originally published on this site

Former Spotify sales executive sues company for alleged gender discriminationSpotify Ceo Daniel Ek Credit Wsj

Former Spotify sales executive Hong Perez has filed a lawsuit against the streaming giant for gender discrimination and defamation. The lawsuit alleges that Spotify was the host of a “boys club” culture that led to “systematic discrimination” against women, and directly names Perez’s prior boss, Brian Berner, as a key perpetrator in the organization of “boys’ trips” that excluded comparatively better qualified women from attendance on trips to large scale events like the Sundance Film Festival in 2016 and 2017.

Perez’s complaint claims that Berner’s ethical misconduct at the company prompted her removal from Spotify’s staff, after Berner supposedly accepted free tickets to Madison Square Garden and carried out an unapproved discounting deal. Perez alleges that her former supervisor blamed her for the code of conduct violations, which led Spotify to fire Perez. Perez’s case maintains that Berner was not only negligent and unprofessional in his company interactions, but “was well aware of [fellow] male employees violating the code of conduct, yet did nothing.”

Perez cites all-male excursions to strip clubs, an HR executive’s comment that his curse word of choice is “c*nt,” and a CFO’s remark that he “does not care about diversity at the company” as further instances of the accused internal hostility at Spotify. “At Spotify, we do not tolerate discrimination of any kind at any level,” a representative for the Swedish media platform told Variety“While we cannot comment on the specific details of a pending litigation, these claims are without merit.”

H/T: High Snobiety

Kanye West and TIDAL are hit with an $84-million lawsuit

This post was originally published on this site

Kanye West and TIDAL are hit with an $84-million lawsuitKanye Tidal Lawsuit

Kanye West has certainly had a summer of GOOD Music, dropping five new albums with his label: Pusha T, his own, a joint Kid Cudi project, NAS, and finally, Teyana Taylor. Kanye’s summer isn’t all coming up roses though, with reports surfacing that claim Ye and TIDAL are getting hit with an $84 million lawsuit.

Back when Kanye released, The Life Of Pablo, he announced on Twitter that his album would be hosted exclusively on TIDAL, saying, “my album will never never never be on Apple.” This, of course, prompted users to sign up and subscribe to TIDAL, handing over personal information to sign up for the service. Today, the album is available on all platforms, thus, a fraud lawsuit was put forward, stating users were “fraudulently induced to subscribe to TIDAL and uniformly tricked into handing over their private data and credit card information by a singular mistruth.”

Judge Gregory Woods already handed Mr. West and the streaming platform a loss in the form of an 18-page decision. Judge Woods ultimately upheld the fraudulent inducement and unjust enrichment claims which means the case would have to be settled out of court or go to trial.

Photo Credit: @tidal/Instagram

Renter of Calvin Harris’ California property files lawsuit against the producer

This post was originally published on this site

Suffice to say, this is not “what he came for.”

The renter of Calvin Harris’ Sunset Strip home in West Hollywood filed a lawsuit against the producer and alleges that the property had a number of faults, including issues with hot water and heating, broken doors, and, ironically, a sound system that didn’t work. The tenant, Harry Moscatel, leased the residence for $35,000 a month, after putting down a $70,000 security deposit.

Moscatel’s lawsuit seeks to recover some of the money that Moscatel spent in his rent payments. The legal documents cite Moscatel’s identification as a legally blind man protected under the Americans With Disabilities Act as one of its arguments.

Moscatel has vacated Harris’ property.

H/T: Hot New Hip Hop

The US Department of Justice pins Live Nation as potential monopoly

This post was originally published on this site

When the Justice Department allowed a merger of the music industry’s two most dominate companies — Live Nation and Ticketmaster — critics feared the worst.

A merger between the world’s biggest concert promoter and live entertainment’s leading ticket provider would, essentially, “create an industry monolith, one capable of crippling competitors in the ticketing business,” according to the New York Times.

The merger was granted back in 2010, with federal officials reassuring skeptics that the terms of the legal settlement would block monopolistic behavior by Live Nation and ultimately bolster market competition.

Eight years later, and the newer, more bloated Live Nation has a hand in nearly every aspect of the live concert world. Not only that, according several complaints filed to the DOJ, the company has become the biggest bully on the block. The most damning evidence came from Live Nation’s biggest competitor, AEG, that claims emails between venue managers and Live Nation representatives suggest venues were bypassed by Live Nation tours after adopting AEG’s ticketing program, AXS.

Live Nation dismissed AEG’s complaints as tactical mischaracterizations: “You have a disgruntled competitor that is trying to explain their loss around the boogeyman that there were threats made that nobody can document,” said Daniel M. Wall, Live Nation’s antitrust lawyer.


“Now Department of Justice officials are looking into serious accusations about Live Nation’s behavior in the marketplace,” a New York Times article reports. “They have been reviewing complaints that Live Nation, which manages 500 artists, including U2 and Miley Cyrus, has used its control over concert tours to pressure venues into contracting with its subsidiary, Ticketmaster.”

The report continues, “The company’s chief competitor, AEG, has told the officials that venues it manages that serve Atlanta; Las Vegas; Minneapolis; Salt Lake City; Louisville; and Oakland were told they would lose valuable shows if Ticketmaster was not used as a vendor, a possible violation of antitrust law.”

Other DOJ complaints are investigating possible Live Nation threats aimed at venues in Austin and Boston.

The live music business has historically been a collaborative effort, with multiple parties coming together to put on a show, including promoters, talent agents and managers, venues, and ticketing companies. But Live Nation now runs all of them.

Worldwide, it operates more than 200 venues; last year, it promoted upwards of 30,000 shows and sold 500 million tickets; and, since the merger, it has acquired Lollapalooza and Bonnaroo, as well as gobbling up smaller promotional and ticketing companies from all over the US to Europe.


With the help of Ticketmaster, the behemoth company has engorged the competition: “Ticket prices are at record highs. Service fees are far from reduced. And Ticketmaster, part of the Live Nation empire, still tickets 80 of the top 100 arenas in the country. No other company has more than a handful.”

Ticketmaster president, Jared Smith, responded to the NYT article, defending the legality of its practices,

The New York Times article suggests that any benefits of being a vertically integrated company are, in and of themselves, anticompetitive   They insinuate that we “condition” content. That we “retaliate” when Ticketmaster is not selected as a venue’s ticketing partner. In short, they say we have stifled competition.

The reality is that none of these things are true. It is absolutely against Live Nation and Ticketmaster policy to threaten venues that they won’t get any Live Nation shows if they don’t use Ticketmaster. We also do not re-route content as retaliation for a lost ticketing deal. Live Nation is the most artist-focused company in the world, and misusing our relationship with artists to “settle scores” with venues would be both bad business and counter to our core beliefs.

No official statement has been released from Live Nation’s CEO, Michael Rapino. The company has just settled a $110 million lawsuit with Songkick over rights to ticket sales.

H/T: Consequence of Sound |Via: New York Times