Jamie Foxx Hit With $75 Million Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

  • Thread starter Thread starter jadillac1181
  • Start date Start date
J

jadillac1181

New member
http://eurweb.com/story/eur27082.cfm

"*A Detroit man is claiming that Jamie Foxx’s song “Heaven,” which the Oscar winner debuted on “The Oprah Winfrey Show” in December, is nothing but a reworked version of his song "One of God's Angels Is AWOL," which he wrote and copyrighted in 2003.


Michael A. Johnson is suing Foxx in Eastern Michigan's U.S. District Court for $75 million – that’s $15 million apiece from defendants Foxx, J Records, Sony Records, Sony BMG Music Entertainment and Face Production to cover damages, royalties that he has missed out on and the "mass exposure" he would have received if that song had been attributed to him.


Johnson first came across the tune when the rest of the world did – while watching “Oprah” – and soon recognized the lyrics from his own tune. Johnson also says he did a mass mailing of his song lyrics to record companies, including Sony, whose J Records label released Foxx's album, “Unpredictable.”


"The songs are so similar that, if my song was released today, people would think I copied Jamie's song," Johnson wrote in his complaint. "My songs were sent out in hopes of a contract, not to be changed and disguised as someone else's creation."


Explaining “Heaven” to Oprah’s audience last year, Foxx said: "The song is basically saying that there was an angel up in heaven who was this little girl angel and it was God's favorite angel. She would always look at the plight of this couple who weren't able to have a kid, so, one day when God was having a role call, she didn't answer. She had snuck off and blessed them with a child."

Johnson countered in his complaint: "Even if Mr. Foxx's song was inspired by his daughter, they are still my lyrics. Maybe Mr. Foxx thought or assumed, because my songs were sent out hand-written, that I was not professional enough to have had my songs copyrighted and took advantage of that."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Wow...good thing dude had his stuff copyrighted for real. He wont get 75, but he'll prolly get at least 10. I hope Sony/J Records has to front most of the bill for stealing someones work.
 
Last edited:
Why do you assume this guy is right? Remember the Kanye/Luda case?
 
So Foolish said:
Why do you assume this guy is right? Remember the Kanye/Luda case?

Just an assumption....but he says he has a copyright. If he can prove that he might have a shot...if the songs are similar then it's not probably just a coincidence.
 
i think dude can get his mioney fo real, don't know if he is tellign the truth or not, but it deosn't seem like som dumb ish....


Jamie Foxx is a BITER???
 
That's one of the main reasons why I capture my sessions on video.
 
And that song is pretty tight. I love the beginning piano part.

Is he suing over the lyrics AND music, or just the lyrics?

I didn't read the link.
 
Craig G said:
And that song is pretty tight. I love the beginning piano part.

Is he suing over the lyrics AND music, or just the lyrics?

I didn't read the link.

I dont know...but whoever wrote the lyrics needs to be slapped upside the head. One line in that song says, "And when God woke up that mornin...." :confused: Since when does God sleep? News to me.
 
this isnt the same thing as the Luda/Kanye thing though... this is written word, not music that was sampled.

It's a lot more strict in plagiarism terms of copyright infringement, it's a whole new ball game.

They'll settle out of court for a quiet sum if he ends up gaining ground.
 
CrAcKa-JaCk said:
this isnt the same thing as the Luda/Kanye thing though... this is written word, not music that was sampled.

It's a lot more strict in plagiarism terms of copyright infringement, it's a whole new ball game.

They'll settle out of court for a quiet sum if he ends up gaining ground.
May I ask what the hell you're talking about?
 
Kanye/Luda was the same thing. some other ppl said it copied their song "Straight Up". It's hard to tell if he's win but what i do know as most do is he ain't getting 75mil.
 
he's suing for the words, not the melody.



It's a different game. if you knew anything, you'd know what i was talking about.


I thought the Luda thing was over the melody, the main sound from the track.
 
Last edited:
Looks like you should maybe try to KNOW something?
 
Last edited:
I do know something. Ask any higher learning scholar. They'll tell you grounds for philisophical infringement are insane.

Dan Brown is being sued by two Colombian/Spanish (can't remember which one) for like, $100 mill, because his book seems like it was plagiarized from the two Hispanics.

Sh*ts is crazy man.... Copywritten text is a pretty hard thing to fight.
 
Like Nas said,

"No Idea's Original/
There's nothin' new under the sun....."
 
So Foolish said:

Any time I'm making music I make sure to capture it on video. One of the reasons I do it is to protect myself from any lawsuits and in case I may have to sue somebody.
 
Pete Marriott said:
Any time I'm making music I make sure to capture it on video. One of the reasons I do it is to protect myself from any lawsuits and in case I may have to sue somebody.
Would that help? How can you prove that the video was recorded before they made their song?
 
Back
Top