Fred Durst and Limp Bizkit weren’t doing it all for the nookie — they wanted their money also.
via: Variety
Limp Bizkit is allowed to move forward with their lawsuit against Universal Music Group that alleges the label deliberately withheld as much as $200 million in royalties. The claims against the music company range from breach of contract to fraudulent concealment, fraudulent business practices, copyright infringement and more.
In a decision filed March 17, and reviewed by Variety, Judge Percy Anderson ruled Limp Bizkit frontman Fred Durst will have to refile a majority of his claims in state courts (California or New York). The Judge also denied UMG’s motion to dismiss the band’s allegations of copyright infringement, allowing those claims to proceed in his federal court.
Limp Bizkit is allowed to move forward with their lawsuit against Universal Music Group that alleges the label deliberately withheld as much as $200 million in royalties. The claims against the music company range from breach of contract to fraudulent concealment, fraudulent business practices, copyright infringement and more.
In a decision filed March 17, and reviewed by Variety, Judge Percy Anderson ruled Limp Bizkit frontman Fred Durst will have to refile a majority of his claims in state courts (California or New York). The Judge also denied UMG’s motion to dismiss the band’s allegations of copyright infringement, allowing those claims to proceed in his federal court.
The issue of rescission will require an analysis of state law in both New York and California courts, “involving facts and law that are distinct from those necessary to adjudicate the copyright claim,” according to the March 17 document. Despite these complexities, UMG is being asked to file its answer to the copyright claims by no later than April 7.
Limp Bizkit originally claimed UMG “designed and implemented royalty software and systems that were deliberately designed to conceal artists’ royalties and keep those profits for itself.” UMG filed its motion to dismiss the lawsuit in November, claiming that the lawsuit, and specifically the alleged concealment of royalties, was “fiction.”
Limp Bizkit, which hit the peak of its popularity in the late 90s and early 2000s, claims that it’s not the only group to be stiffed on royalties and that possibly hundreds of other artists have also suffered from this model.
Durst claims that the Flip Records, which initially signed the band in 1996 prior to the Interscope deal in Dec. 2000, disclosed to him that they were receiving millions of dollars due to recent renewed interest in the band (“millions of streaming users per month on Spotify alone,” his lawyers wrote). Durst’s attorneys also say the label did end up giving the band $1.03 million and $2.3 million went to Durst’s own Flawless Records. They believe they are owed more.
Comments