- ChaseLawyers Newsletter
- Archive
- Page 2
Archive
Domain Names, Copyright Laws, and the Legal Lines That Keep Moving
The long-running fight over Slipknot.com just heated up. A specialist domain attorney has stepped in to defend the anonymous owner of the band’s namesake domain, pushing back against Slipknot’s cybersquatting claims and challenging the case on jurisdiction grounds. Meanwhile, Cox Communications is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a $1 billion judgment holding it liable for users’ music piracy — warning of “seismic and dangerous ramifications” if the ruling stands. Both cases test how far intellectual property protections can (and should) reach in today’s digital economy.
Spotify in the Crosshairs: Streaming Royalties and Alleged Fraud
Two major legal challenges are putting Spotify’s payment models under a microscope. A class action lawsuit alleges the streamer allows massive artificial streaming, with Drake’s catalog singled out as a key beneficiary, costing other artists hundreds of millions. At the same time, Spotify is aggressively defending its use of an audiobook bundling model that significantly reduces what it pays songwriters. The cases represent a fundamental legal assault on how the world’s largest audio platform counts streams and calculates payouts.
Streaming Royalties, Social Media, and the Legal Gray Zones in Music
Universal Music has won three lawsuits over streaming royalties in the Netherlands, with a court ruling that older artist contracts don’t guarantee higher payouts for digital plays. Across the ocean, Lizzo is facing a lawsuit of a very different kind — not for releasing a song, but for posting a short clip that allegedly sampled a 1970s track without permission. Together, these stories show how even legacy deals and viral posts can become legal flashpoints in the evolving music economy.
Cybersquatting, AI Theft, and the Fight for Artist Rights
Slipknot is suing to reclaim the domain name slipknot.com, which they’ve never owned due to a 2001 registration by an anonymous third party. The band accuses the domain holder of cybersquatting and profiting from their brand without permission. Meanwhile, indie musicians are fighting back against AI company Udio, alleging it scraped and trained on their music without consent — harming their ability to earn a living. This new lawsuit adds a fresh twist to the growing list of AI copyright cases, shifting the spotlight to smaller creators rather than major labels.
Music Copyright Cases: One Dismissed, One Reignited
Two high-profile cases are shaking up how the music industry navigates legal risks — one around reputation, the other around AI. A federal judge has dismissed Drake’s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us, ruling that the lyrics were clearly opinion, not fact. Meanwhile, music publishers have revived their copyright lawsuit against AI company Anthropic after the company’s own documents suggested its chatbot could reproduce protected lyrics. Together, the cases show how defamation and copyright claims are evolving in today’s digital music landscape.
Music Copyright Cases: One Dismissed, One Reignited
Two major cases are testing the boundaries of copyright in music — one fading out, the other coming back stronger. A judge has dismissed the much-discussed lawsuit over Drake’s “Not Like Us” diss track, ruling that there was no valid claim for copyright infringement. Meanwhile, the music publishing industry is gaining ground in a separate fight: a federal judge has reinstated a lawsuit against AI company Anthropic, allowing copyright claims to proceed after the court found the tech firm’s own disclosures undercut its defense. Together, these cases highlight the evolving legal landscape where music, AI, and fair use collide.
Disney Faces Legal Fire from Both Inside and Out
From heated shareholder showdowns to public domain battles, Disney is navigating a wave of legal challenges that could reshape its image and influence. A major investor lawsuit is putting executive decisions under the microscope — including the handling of political content and talent suspensions. At the same time, Disney is being sued over its stance on public domain usage of Mickey Mouse, in a case that tests just how far copyright protections can stretch.
Defamation and Copyright Wars Escalate
This week's headlines are dominated by two blockbuster legal disputes with far-reaching implications. In a sharp rebuke, a federal judge dismissed former President Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, criticizing the 85-page filing as a "tedious and burdensome" platform for political grievances. Simultaneously, a new front has opened in the copyright battle against AI, as three major film studios have jointly sued Chinese AI firm MiniMax. The studios claim the company's technology, which can generate images and videos of characters like Minions and Darth Vader, poses an "existential threat" to the creative industry. Together, these cases highlight the escalating tensions between public figures and the press, and between content creators and AI developers.
Defamation & Trademark Disputes Take Center Stage
Two recent lawsuits highlight how high-profile figures and institutions are pushing back—one claiming defamation, the other protecting brand identity. A U.S. Navy veteran wins against CNN but loses his suit against AP and others; in a separate case, Neil Young is challenged by a fashion brand over his band’s name. Both cases raise tough questions for the media, artists, and how law navigates reputation and branding.
Copyright Battles Heat Up Over AI Training and Characters
Two new lawsuits are putting artificial intelligence in the middle of copyright law’s biggest questions. Anthropic, maker of the Claude chatbot, is offering a multi-billion-dollar settlement to authors who claim their books were used without permission to train AI models. At the same time, Warner Bros. Discovery is suing Midjourney over AI-generated images that allegedly copy iconic characters like Batman and Superman.
When Copyright Cases Go Big
Two new legal battles show the stark range of today’s copyright landscape. Cox Communications is taking its $1 billion music piracy verdict to the U.S. Supreme Court — a case that could reset ISP liability for user-generated infringement. Meanwhile, the producers of G20, a Viola Davis action thriller, are facing a detailed copyright lawsuit from a screenwriter who says the film copied her script.One case could reshape the rules for tech platforms; the other puts a spotlight on how tough it is for individual creators to prove their work was stolen.
Royalty Battles Heat Up
Two high-profile lawsuits are turning up the volume on who really gets paid in music. Latin artist Rauw Alejandro is facing a $10M claim over alleged unauthorized samples on his album Saturno, while a court has ruled that Supertramp’s frontman must share streaming royalties with his bandmates — even decades after going solo. Both cases show that when it comes to copyright, samples, and splits, the law doesn’t forget.