FOLLOW US

Cher, the legendary singer, and performer, finds herself back in court in the ongoing epic royalty lawsuit. She is in the midst of a legal battle against, the widow of her late musical partner and ex-husband, Sonny Bono. 

Cher firmly believes that she is owed substantial royalties and is determined to fight for what she claims is rightfully hers. In 2021, Cher sued former Republican U.S. Representative Mary Bono. 

The lawsuit, titled Cher v. Bono, is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California under case number 2:21-cv-08157.

 Court documents reveal that Cher has accused Mary of withholding money owed from the classic hits of the iconic duo, Sonny & Cher. 

Cher and Sonny Bono were performing together as Sonny & Cher in 1964. They were married in 1967. And their divorce was in 1978.

During their marriage, the iconic music couple wrote and performed music together. And also had a popular television show, at the time. 

Their divorce agreement divides the royalties from Sonny and Cher hits like “I Got You Babe” and “The Beat Goes On” equally after their very public divorce.

In the suit, Cher said she and Sonny agreed to split their royalties evenly in their 1975 divorce. The musician said Mary had been attempting to improperly collect royalties not owed to her.

Cher demanded $1 million in damages and asked the court to find the divorce agreement to be valid. In response, Mary asked the court to throw out all claims.

Mary Bono filed a countersuit, claiming that she and Cher had previously cooperated in developing a mutually acceptable mechanism for collecting and disbursing the royalties.

Mary argues that this cooperation had been ongoing for over two decades. However, she asserts that the cooperation has now broken down, leading to this legal dispute.

Mary's countersuit requests that the court deny Cher the right to approve or disapprove a worldwide administrator for the royalties owed to her and the heirs of Sonny Bono.

Mary seeks the court's order granting her the right to exploit the recordings she holds and any revenue derived from future agreements related to them.

Epic Royalty Lawsuit Ongoing

The lawsuit, taking place in a Los Angeles federal court, delves into the details of Cher's claims, asserting that her rights to the royalties were granted through the couple's divorce settlement. 

Cher further contends that there is a "scheme" in place aimed at depriving her of her 50% share of the portfolio.

A federal judge initially ruled in March against dismissing the case, acknowledging the validity of Cher's claims and setting the stage for further proceedings. 

Cher's lawsuit emphasizes the agreed-upon split of royalties in the 1975 divorce settlement, claiming that Mary has been wrongfully attempting to collect royalties that are not owed to her.

 In her legal action, Cher seeks $1 million in damages and requests the court to affirm the validity of the divorce agreement. 

Mary, on the other hand, seeks the dismissal of all claims, arguing that federal law grants her the authority to terminate the agreement, asserting that the 50% deal had expired, and the royalties should now be paid to Sonny's heirs.

Mary's motion highlights a provision in the controversial Copyright Act of 1976, which allows authors to cancel transfers of their copyrights under specific circumstances and reclaim them after 35 years.

 The Copyright Act is also central to recent disputes involving prominent entities like   Marvel, and its parent company Disney. And it echoes many elements of Taylor Swifts' battle to own and be paid for her own music.

In the meantime, the epic royalty battle will continue.