Chad Hugo has asked a federal judge to reject Pharrell Williams‘ bid to throw out his lawsuit over the songs, credits, and royalties of The Neptunes.
In a filing dated October 16, Hugo’s lawyers accuse Williams of an “effort to rewrite history and turn The Neptunes’ success into the work of only one person.”
The filing, submitted to the US District Court for the Central District of California, can be read in full here.
“Defendants ask the Court to write Chad Hugo out of The Neptunes on the pleadings, before a single document has been produced,” the filing states. “But The Neptunes were two people.
“For three decades, Hugo and Pharrell Williams wrote and produced records together under that name. Hugo has always been at the center of the Neptunes[’] success and is equally responsible for the duo’s special place in [the] industry.
“Over the past few years, Williams has sought to erase Hugo from one of the greatest hip-hip [sic] duos of all time.”
“For three decades, Hugo and Pharrell Williams wrote and produced records together under that name. Hugo has always been at the center of the Neptunes[’] success and is equally responsible for the duo’s special place in [the] industry.”
Chad Hugo‘s filing
Hugo, who formed The Neptunes with Williams in the early 1990s, claims he is a co-author and co-owner of songs the pair made together.
He alleges that Williams kept the credit and the income from those songs for himself.
Hugo wants the court to declare him a joint owner of the copyrights and to order an accounting of his share of the money the works have earned.
Williams and Talamasca, Inc., a company Hugo alleges Williams controls, have asked the court to dismiss the case.
Hugo‘s filing says the motion’s lead argument is that his complaint does not identify the works at issue. The motion also argues that the complaint fails to distinguish the musical compositions from the sound recordings.
The motion further asks the judge to decline to hear Hugo‘s other claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, if the copyright claims are dismissed.
If the judge dismisses the copyright claims and declines to keep the rest, Hugo would be left to pursue his royalty and fiduciary duty claims in state court.
Hugo filed his original complaint on January 23, in a dispute over The Neptunes and N.E.R.D., the group the pair later founded.
In February, he amended the complaint to add the copyright claims, naming eight tracks he says he helped create, as MBW reported.
The third and latest version of the complaint names just one track: U Gotta by EarthGang.
Hugo‘s lawyers say U Gotta is one example and that the case covers the songs and recordings from nearly 50 studio sessions he says the pair held as The Neptunes between 2019 and 2021.
“On U Gotta, Hugo was removed as an artist from a track that the recording artists themselves say he helped create,” the filing claims.
According to the filing, EarthGang confirmed Hugo’s contribution during an appearance on the radio show The Breakfast Club.
“Defendants’ demand for more particularity is especially unfair given that it is within their control,” the filing states. “Hugo repeatedly sought the relevant royalty statements, books, and records from 2021 through 2024, but received almost nothing, despite counsel’s acknowledgment that additional documents exist.”
At the center of the case is an arrangement Hugo says the pair struck in February 2019.
He claims Williams told him he “never wanted to work without [him] again” and asked him to come to Miami to make music as The Neptunes.
According to Hugo, they agreed to split production 50/50 and to share the publishing on each song equally. He says those were the same terms they had always used.
“Williams then kept the credit, the publishing, and the royalties, and he denied that Hugo co-authored anything,” the filing alleges.
Under the US Copyright Act, people who create a work together, intending their contributions to merge into a single whole, share ownership of its copyright.
Hugo‘s filing calls the motion “the next step” in Williams’ effort to erase him. It says the motion “asks the Court to treat a co-founder as a hired hand” by applying the joint-authorship test the Ninth Circuit set out in Aalmuhammed v. Lee in 2000, a test that, according to the filing, “was built for a consultant on someone else’s film.”
Hugo argues that an agreement to split the publishing on every song equally shows the pair intended to be co-authors.
Hugo‘s filing concedes that his latest complaint left out the definition of which works are covered, calling it “the one genuine drafting gap.”
“Dismissal of a claim arising from a thirty-year partnership is not a proportionate response,” Hugo‘s lawyers write.
If the judge finds any gaps, Hugo has asked for 21 days to file a revised complaint.
Hugo says it would describe his contributions track by track, including melodies, chord progressions, drum programming, instrumentation, and arrangement.
“Hugo can limit his claimed interest to the share Williams holds or claims and disclaim any challenge to third-party co-writers’ shares,” the filing states. “A declaration allocating Williams’ claimed share between Williams and Hugo impairs no absent writer’s interest.”
If Hugo limits his claim that way, any share awarded to him would come out of Williams’ portion, rather than those of the other writers on the tracks.
The filing accepts that US copyright law gives Hugo no standalone right to be credited, but argues that credit is still available to him under state law and the pair’s 2019 agreement.
Hugo’s filing says Williams‘ motion also hints, without formally seeking dismissal on that basis, that the claims may have been brought too late.
It says Williams’ lawyers noted that Hugo has had “six separate lawyers,” a point it argues is offered “to build a narrative of delay.”
“Defendants’ own exhibits settle the point,” the filing argues, adding that agreements Williams submitted to the court paused the legal clock from January 3, 2023, to January 24, 2026.
Judge André Birotte Jr. has not yet ruled on the motion.Music Business Worldwide
