Issue No. 029
July 17, 2026
New York
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IP Briefing · by ESCA Legal
|
|
|
|
| Songwriters David Bravo and Jean Albert Renaud filed a copyright lawsuit alleging that Nasty Girl and I Wanna Thank Ya used elements of their 1980 composition Skatin' without permission. |
| § | The complaint names Sean Diddy Combs, Snoop Dogg, the estates of The Notorious B.I.G. and Angie Stone, Nelly, producer Jazze Pha, and other defendants connected to the two recordings. | | § | Bravo and Renaud allege that harmonic, rhythmic, and melodic elements from Skatin' became the backing track for both songs. | | § | The plaintiffs say they discovered the alleged uses in May 2024, nearly two decades after the later recordings were released. | | § | Sony Music Publishing also faces contract and fiduciary-duty claims tied to its handling of the composers' request for enforcement. The defendants have not yet responded to the new complaint. |
|
| Continue reading → |
| § ESCA Takeaway |
| Copyright disputes often turn on the permissions and records behind familiar creative works. This issue follows alleged uncleared samples, a celebrity photograph, music tools built into social platforms, and books used to train an AI system. |
|
|
| More IP Stories |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| Photographer Annie Leibovitz and her licensing agency filed a Manhattan federal copyright complaint against Observer Media over a 2019 Vogue portrait of Justin and Hailey Bieber. |
| § | The complaint alleges that Observer.com reproduced the portrait in a 2020 article without a license. | | § | Leibovitz says a May 2024 notice demanded removal of the image, but the photograph remained online as of July 16. | | § | The plaintiffs seek profits tied to the alleged use and statutory damages of up to $150,000 for each unauthorized use. | | § | Observer Media had not publicly responded to the complaint when the story was published. |
|
|
Why it matters
Editorial use of a celebrity photograph still depends on the rights attached to the image. A takedown demand and the records showing how a publication obtained a photograph can become central evidence in a later infringement case.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Verdict |
|
|
| A California federal court granted partial summary judgment to both Epidemic Sound and Meta in a copyright dispute involving music used through Meta's Reels Remix feature. |
| § | Epidemic Sound established that it holds valid copyrights in several tracks at issue. | | § | Meta established that Epidemic Sound cannot pursue statutory damages for another group of tracks. | | § | The order resolves only part of the parties' dispute, leaving the remaining claims to continue. | | § | The case concerns music made available or reused through tools on Meta's social platforms. |
|
|
Why it matters
Platform copyright cases can divide into separate questions about ownership, infringement, and available damages. The ruling narrows those questions without ending the dispute over how music is reused through social-media features.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| Hachette, Cengage, Elsevier, author Scott Turow, and S.C.R.I.B.E. filed a proposed class action alleging that Google copied books and other works to train Gemini without authorization. |
| § | The complaint alleges that Google used works supplied for limited services such as Google Books and Google Play for a separate AI-training purpose. | | § | The plaintiffs also claim that copyright-management information was removed or altered to conceal the source of training materials. | | § | The case was filed in the Southern District of New York and seeks to represent a class of authors and publishers. | | § | Google had not publicly responded to the new complaint when the story was published. |
|
|
Why it matters
The case focuses on whether copies supplied for one defined purpose may be reused for AI development. That consent question is distinct from disputes built only around material collected from the open web.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not subscribed? Sign up for future editions of Marked by ESCA Legal.
|
|
|
|
This newsletter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Published by ESCA Legal. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Attorney advertising; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
|