Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

DJ Dropped from Dispute Over Use of Beastie Boys Music

By Jan Wolfe
November 30, 2013

After the Beastie Boys sued over the unlicensed use of several of the rap group's tracks in a remix on the soundtrack to a promotional video, defendant energy-drink maker Monster Energy Co. tried to shift the blame onto an unsuspecting disc jockey. That tactic didn't sit well with Southern District Judge Paul Engelmayer, who dismissed the DJ from the litigation. Beastie Boys v. Monster Energy Co., 12 Civ. 6065.

In a 24-page ruling, District Judge Engelmayer threw out a third-party complaint Monster brought against Zach Sciacca (a.k.a. Z-Trip), a DJ known for mixing songs into mash-ups. Monster alleged that the only reason it engaged in unauthorized use of the Beastie Boys' music was that Sciacca fraudulently represented that he had authority to grant a license to the songs. Judge Engelmayer called that claim “risible,” in siding with DJ Z-Trip's lawyer Stewart Levy at Eisenberg Tanchum & Levy and the Beasties' lawyers at Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton.

In 2012, Monster sponsored a snowboarding competition in Canada that included an after-party featuring Z-Trip. Monster made a video about its snowboarding festival and posted the video on YouTube. The soundtrack to the video was “Mega-Mix,” a remix of various Beastie Boys songs created by Z-Trip. The Beasties had approved of Z-Trip's use of their songs. The band never signed off on Monster using the music in its video, however, and the company never sought the permission.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.