Usher, Sony Must Face Claim They Stole Song

     (CN) – A Florida judge refused to dismiss a defendant in a DJ’s copyright lawsuit against Usher over the song “Hey Daddy.”
     Aubrey Davis, who is professionally known as DJ Mixx, sued Usher, Sony Music Entertainment and several other defendants in July 2012 in the Southern District of Florida federal court.
     Davis claimed that Usher’s song “Hey Daddy (Daddy’s Home)” is based on his song, “Let’s Go,” which came from his copyrighted musical composition, “5-15-09.”
     One of the defendants, Notting Dale Songs Inc., filed a motion in January 2013 to be dismissed from the case.
     In his lawsuit, Davis stated that he recorded “Let’s Go” in 2009, added vocals from local singer Omari Hodge and the song became a hit in the Miami nightclub scene.
     Davis stated that after he gave a copy of the song to a local radio DJ, the station’s assistant program director, Khaled bin Adbul Khaled.
     According to Davis, Khaled passed the song on to Jermaine “Mayne Zayne” Jackson and Andrew “Dru Brett” Harr, whose musical careers he managed. Khaled also worked with defendants Usher and Algernod “Plies” Washington, according to the complaint.
     The result, Davis stated, was that Usher’s “Hey Daddy” song was included on Usher’s 2009 album “Raymond v. Raymond” and sounded similar to “Let’s Go.”
     “Hey Daddy” peaked at No. 24 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart and No. 2 on the R&B/Hip-Hop chart.
     Notting Dale was listed as a defendant along with Richard Preston “Rico Love” Butler, EMI April Music Inc., Trac-N-Field Entertainment LLC and UR-IV Music Inc.
     Notting Dale argued that it should be dismissed from the lawsuit, seeking a more definite statement under federal civil procedure laws, as well as for failure to join Omari Hodge as a party.
     The federal court denied the motion in a decision written by Judge Federico A. Moreno.
     “The complaint amply and distinctly asserts that Davis is seeking damages for defendants’ alleged infringements of the copyright in ‘5-15-09’ and ‘5-15-09’ alone. Davis nowhere implies that he is asserting a claim for the infringement of any rights he holds in ‘Let’s Go,'” Moreno wrote.
     “In this case, Notting Dale has not argued that Hodge cannot be made a party or that joinder is not feasible. Since joiner of Hodge is presumably feasible, Notting Dale cannot seek dismissal of Davis’ complaint,” he added.
     Moreno also stated the Hodge should not be joined to the case because he lacks an ownership interest in the “5-15-09” composition.

%d bloggers like this: