UMG hits back at Limp Bizkit's $200M lawsuit, calls hidden royalty classes 'fiction'

Universal Music Group (UMG) is responding to a lawsuit by Limp Bizkit frontman Fred Durst claiming the label owes the band more than $200 million, calling the claims “fantasy” and demanding they be thrown out of court.

The blockbuster lawsuit, filed last month in Los Angeles federal court, alleged that Durst “hasn't seen a dime in royalties” over the decades — and that hundreds of other artists may have been treated similarly under “systemic” and “fraudulent” policies.

But in UMG's first response on Friday, the company's lawyers said the lawsuit should be dismissed immediately because it is “based on a fallacy.”

“Plaintiffs' entire narrative that UMG tried to hide rights is a fiction,” he writes Rollin A. Ransomattorney with the Sidley Austin law firm representing UMG in the litigation. “Plaintiffs' complaint fails as a matter of law and should be dismissed with prejudice.”

The main problem with Durst's claims? According to UMG's lawyers, it's that the documents included in its own lawsuit “throw away” its claims. They cite specific emails in which a UMG executive appears to have approached the royalties but was turned down by the group's business manager.

“More than a year prior to plaintiffs' 'discovery' of alleged 'hidden' royalties, UMG positively and unilaterally contacted Limp Bizkit's representative so that it could begin paying royalties to the band and was instead informed by him that all but one member of Limp Bizkit (including plaintiff Durst) had assigned their royalty shares to others, and therefore were not entitled to royalty payments from UMG,” the company wrote in Friday's filing.

Attorneys for Durst did not immediately return a request for comment Monday. They will have the opportunity to file a formal response to the court opposing UMG's motion to dismiss the case.

Durst and Limp Bizkit sued UMG in October, claiming the band had “never received any royalties from UMG,” despite their massive success over the years: “The band has yet to be paid one cent by UMG for rights until he takes action. “

This claim was something of a surprise. How could one of the biggest bands of their era, who sold millions of records during the music industry-fueled glory days of MTV, never get royalties nearly three decades later?

According to Durst, the response was a “disgusting and disturbing” plan to hide royalties from artists and “keep those profits for himself.” He claimed the label effectively kept Limp Bizkit in the red with shady bookkeeping, allowing it to falsely claim the band remained uninsured – meaning his royalties had not exceeded the amount the band had been paid in advances.

But in Friday's response, UMG said such claims of “concealment” were undermined by those emails. UMG says the message shows a senior royalties manager reaching out on his own initiative to Paul Ta, the group's chief operating officer, to “start making royalties payments”, but is rejected.

“Mr. Ta rejected this suggestion, responding that all but one member of Limp Bizkit (including plaintiff Durst) “has … sold/assigned their interest [of the royalties] to various companies so that no royalty payments are owed to any of these individuals (including plaintiff Durst),” UMG wrote in Friday's motion.

UMG says Ta later emailed that his statements were false, so the label paid about $3.4 million to the band and its companies — contradicting the suit's claims that he “never received royalties.” .

“Plaintiffs subsequently admit to receiving millions of dollars in payments from UMG,” the label wrote on Friday. “Plaintiffs nevertheless brought this action alleging breach of contract and fraud on their 'suspicion' that they were owed more rights and seeking to void the parties' agreements.”