Background
In July 2021, Ye (formerly Kanye West) hosted a massive album listening party at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta for his then-unreleased album Donda, which was also livestreamed to millions of viewers. During the event, he played an early demo version of the song “Hurricane” that incorporated the instrumental track “MSD PT2” — a work created by producers DJ Khalil (Khalil Abdul-Rahman), Sam Barsh, Dan Seeff, and Josh Mease.
Artist Revenue Advocates LLC, which holds the sound recording rights to “MSD PT2,” sued Ye and his business entities — Yeezy LLC, Yeezy Supply, and Mascotte Holdings — alleging that the track was used without a license, clearance, or payment. Although Ye had given the original artists songwriting credits, the plaintiff argued that credit alone does not substitute for obtaining proper copyright clearance before using a copyrighted work in a public performance and livestream.
The case went to a five-day jury trial in May 2026 in Los Angeles federal court. During the trial, Ye testified and described himself as “very generous,” while the plaintiff’s attorneys argued that Ye had “ghosted” the musicians after using their work.
The Court’s Holding
After deliberation, the eight-member jury unanimously found Ye and his companies liable for copyright infringement. The jury awarded a total of approximately $438,558 in damages, split across the defendants:
- Ye (personally): $176,153
- Yeezy LLC: $176,153
- Yeezy Supply: $41,625
- Mascotte Holdings: $44,627
The infringement was based on the use of the copyrighted instrumental at the listening party — a single public performance and livestream event. Notably, the court had previously ruled in Ye’s favor on broader claims: the plaintiff’s claims that the final commercially released version of “Hurricane” on the Donda album also infringed (based on an alleged interpolation rather than a direct sample) were struck down before trial. Artist Revenue Advocates has indicated it will appeal that narrowing ruling to the Ninth Circuit.
Key Takeaways
- A single public performance can trigger substantial liability. Even though the infringing use occurred at just one event, the jury awarded over $400,000. The livestream to millions of viewers likely amplified the perceived scope of the infringement.
- Songwriting credit is not a license. Giving credit to the original creators did not shield Ye from liability. Copyright law requires affirmative authorization — a license, assignment, or clearance — before a copyrighted work can be publicly performed or reproduced.
- Sampling clearance applies to live performances too. Artists and producers who incorporate unreleased or uncleared samples in live shows and livestreams face the same copyright exposure as if they had released the track commercially.
Why It Matters
This verdict underscores that the era of major album listening parties — high-profile live events that double as marketing spectacles — carries real copyright risk when the material performed has not been fully cleared. For the music industry, the case serves as a reminder that the fast-paced, iterative process of modern album creation, where tracks evolve through multiple demo versions incorporating uncleared samples, can generate liability well before a song reaches commercial release. Artists who showcase works-in-progress at public events should ensure that every sample and interpolation has been properly licensed, or risk facing claims like this one. The plaintiff’s pending Ninth Circuit appeal of the dismissed interpolation claims could further expand the scope of liability if the appellate court disagrees with the district court’s pre-trial narrowing of the case.