Robert A. Jacobs

When prolific budding musicians become renowned and successful superstars, legal claims stemming from their early works can seem to appear from thin air. But attorneys like Jacobs aim to give would-be plaintiffs looking for a payday second thoughts.

Jacobs, who co-chairs Manatt’s entertainment, sports and media litigation practice, has helped some of the industry’s most prominent recording artists navigate their way through complex and often high-profile intellectual property disputes.

Jacobs served as lead defense counsel for seven-time Grammy Award-winning artist Kendrick Lamar in a copyright infringement lawsuit arising from his alleged use of the plaintiff’s sound recording, the 1975 song “Don’t You Want To Stay” by Bill Withers, in his song, “I Do This.” Mattie Music Group v. Lamar, 16-CV02561 (C.D. Cal., filed April 14, 2016).

“It was one of those situations where after he became known, folks came out of the woodwork to make noise about this old recording,” Jacobs said.

After the filing of the lawsuit, which Jacobs described as a relatively straightforward sampling case, a back-and-forth dispute emerged over statute of limitations. The plaintiffs attempted to modify their complaint to broaden their claim for standing, but the parties were able to strike a resolution before things could proceed from there.

“The long story short is that we were able to speak rationally with one another, with the help of the judge,” Jacobs said, noting that the terms of the settlement are confidential. “Fortunately, we didn’t need to engage in discovery and didn’t have to have a long drawn-out process.”

Jacobs was called on to defend Justin Timberlake’s work in a copyright ownership and infringement lawsuit over his use of a 1973 R&B track in his song, “Suit & Tie.”

Jacobs said Timberlake had received permission to sample the song from the track’s owners, Warner Chappell and UMG, and said the case was another instance where the writers of the song “came out of the woodwork” to make claims. Wilson v. Perrell, 16-CV104 (S.D. N.Y. April 10, 2017).

“We ended up having a long drawn-out battle in pre-litigation on it, explaining that yes, we do have the rights, and [the] statute of limitations bars your claims anyway,” Jacobs said.

Jacobs argued that UMG has asserted its copyright for the work since 1973 with not a word from the plaintiff until Timberlake’s 2013 track. A judge agreed, dismissing the lawsuit for exceeding the statute of limitations.

— Steven Crighton