Snoop Dogg, Death Row Settle Copyright Litigation

Snoop Dogg reaches a settlement with a studio musician who accused the rapper of failing to license two backing tracks on his 2022 album, BODR.

Veteran studio musician and producer Trevor Lawrence Jr. sued hip-hop legend Snoop Dogg for allegedly failing to license two backing tracks used on BODR (Back On Death Row), his 2022 album. Now, Snoop and Lawrence have filed a joint motion to dismiss their litigation, with a previous filing stating the two parties reached a settlement through a mediator back in April. The terms of the deal have not been disclosed.

Last summer, well-known drummer and producer Lawrence, who has worked with artists like Alicia Keys, Bruno Mars, Ed Sheeran, and Kendrick Lamar, sued Snoop and his label, Death Row Records. His filing alleged that the rapper failed to clear backing tracks used in two songs on the album: “Get This D—k” and “Pop Pop.”

According to Lawrence’s original lawsuit, he created these two tracks “on spec,” giving them to Snoop in 2020 with which to “experiment” in the studio. However, Lawrence says he made clear that Snoop would still need to license the tracks if he wanted to use them in an album—yet Snoop released BODR two years later, allegedly without a licensing agreement for the tracks’ use.

Worse still, Lawrence claims Snoop didn’t get his permission before releasing both tracks that used the unlicensed material as NFTs (non-fungible tokens). This, allegedly, raked in millions of dollars in profits for Snoop.

Attorneys for Snoop Dogg (whose real name is Calvin Broadus) denied any wrongdoing, asserting the rapper engaged in a draft deal with Lawrence and paid him $20,000 as a “producer fee” before BODR was released. They further claimed that Lawrence cashed that $20,000 check, which effectively conceded that the terms proposed in the deal were acceptable.

Before the two parties reached an agreement, the case was scheduled to go on trial in September in Los Angeles federal court. Neither the Lawrence nor Snoop camps have discussed the terms of the deal, but both parties are reportedly happy to have put the matter behind them.