Donald Glover sued by former record label

Donald Glover aka Childish Gambino's has been sued by his former record label Glassnote Records.

The label is asking a New York court to determine whether the singer has a claim to royalties he says should be paid to him for non-interactive streams of his music.

According to Variety, Glassnote said it has already paid Glover USD 8 million in royalties and is expecting to pay him another USD 2 million before they officially sever ties.

As Gambino, the actor-singer released three studio albums via Glassnote: 'Camp' (2011), 'Because the Internet' (2013), and his latest 'Awaken, My Love!'. Earlier this year, Glover signed with RCA.

As per a filing for declaratory judgment submitted to US District Court in the Southern New York District on July 6, the label contends it is entitled to half of SoundExchange payouts for so-called "non-interactive digital performance royalties" - amount paid by such streaming services as Pandora, Spotify, SiriusXM and other webcasters which are considered digital radio. Typically, such royalties would go to the label who would divide the fees based on its contract with the artiste.

In Glover's case, Glassnote contends it is entitled to a 50 per cent share of such public performance royalties. The other 50 per cent is due to Glover (45 per cent) and to participating featured artistes and producers (five per cent).

Since 2012, the amount paid out to Glover is around USD 700,000.

The artiste, however, insists he is entitled to 100 per cent of those performance royalties and has been collecting the fees directly from SoundExchange.

Glassnote is asking the court to make a determination over the contracted split and that the label be able to keep SoundExchange royalties that it has already received.

According to the complaint, "In late 2017, the License Agreement expired. Shortly thereafter, Glover, apparently unsatisfied with the approximately USD 10 million in royalties already paid or due to him by Glassnote and the 45 per cent of the public performance royalties from SoundExchange, took the position that he was entitled to the entirety of Glassnote's 50 per cent share of public performance royalties from SoundExchange - and that Glassnote was not entitled to any such royalty."
Glassnote states that it had previously "enjoyed a productive and profitable creative and business relationship."