Dr. Dre’s lawyer tries to tie music to business

Attorneys for a former hedge fund manager suing the Beats headphones company for royalties told Andre Young, better known as hip hop legend Dr. Dre, that they wouldn't question his credentials in the music industry.

But they expressed doubt that his impressive music resume would give him any particular insight into contract negotiations and electronics design.

While previous days in court were sparsely attended, the audience was nearly at capacity when Young took the stand Wednesday.

His counsel, Arturo Gonzalez of Morrison & Foerster LLP, led him down a line of questioning that provided a thorough biographical timeline of the entrepreneur's career.

Gonzalez noted the high profile musicians Young had either worked with or supported in the earliest days of their careers, such as Ice Cube, Eminem, and Tupac Shakur.

The jury also heard "California Love," a Shakur song Young produced that Gonzalez introduced as evidence.

Gonzalez's aim seemed to be establishing Young's prominence in and knowledge of the music industry, which would support the defense argument that he and record producer Jimmy Iovine acted largely independently when creating a line of high-end, celebrity-endorsed headphones.

But Susman & Godfrey LLP partner Brian Melton, who represents plaintiff Steven Lamar in his lawsuit against Young and Iovine, failed to see the relevance.

How did the production of the song "California Love," Melton asked, give Dre any insight into the 2007 settlement agreement?

Young initially demurred, but when Melton posed a similar question, asking how the production of his first album, "The Chronic," provided him insight, he acknowledged it did not. After barely an hour on the stand, the court dismissed him.

The hip mogul's testimony was especially brief when compared to his partner Iovine, who spent nearly a day and a half on the stand Tuesday and Wednesday.

Similar to their approach with Young, Beats' attorneys sought to establish Iovine's historic career in the music industry.

But as the more involved business partner of the two, Iovine also offered insight into the formation of Beats and when it was decided to "surgically remove" Lamar from the business deal.

Under cross-examination, Iovine admitted he was fuzzy on contract specifics concerning royalties but noted he's "got lawyers for that."

Regardless of the exact wording of the contract, Iovine said he knew the intent of the agreement was to only pay Lamar for the first line of headphones.

Near the end of his testimony, Iovine's answers deviated at times from the question initially asked, or he challenged the legitimacy of a question.

Susman & Godfrey LLP partner Steve Morrissey initially seemed hesitant to challenge Iovine -- perhaps out of a desire to avoid the perception of attacking a well-liked public figure.

Eventually, however, tensions boiled over.

"Can I get a yes or no?" Morrissey asked, his voice raising.

The perceived aggression didn't sit well with Gonzalez, who warned Morrissey to "back off."

"Excuse me, excuse me. If you want a fight, go outside," Gonzalez said to Morrissey. "I don't appreciate this."

Appearing to address the courtroom in general rather than any attorney in particular, Judge David S. Cunningham III of the Los Angeles County Superior Court noted the attorneys had no issues following the court's civility rules prior to that point.

"I recognize that in the heat of battle, sometimes the gladiators can get a little embroiled," Cunningham said. "But a reminder -- you need to remain professional."

Although the day began with testimony from the defendants, it ended with testimony from the plaintiff.

Taking the stand for the second time over the course of trial, Lamar was asked to explain his relationship with audio studio Pentagram, which was actually the entity responsible for paying Lamar's royalty, not Beats.

While the contract specifies only Pentagram was capable of bringing legal action against Beats in relation to the royalties agreement, Lamar said nothing in the agreement precluded his litigation against Iovine and Young for breach of contract.

Asked to explain his offer to partners at Pentagram, in which he promised to cover their legal fees if they joined his lawsuit, Lamar initially seemed to disagree with the statement before doubling back and admitting he offered to pay their legal fees.

"They said they did not want to pursue this," Lamar testified.

Despite everything, Lamar said he was "proud" of the project, and Young and Iovine, "to their credit," executed the plan well.

Ultimately, though, Lamar acknowledged he might do a few things differently if given the chance.

"I think I would have tried to communicate more directly with Mr. Iovine," Lamar said.

But would he go back and change anything about the contract?

"No, absolutely not," Lamar said. "The contract is the contract."