Hip-hop group Salt-N-Pepa has sued Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging the music company is preventing them from reclaiming ownership of their master recordings, in breach of US copyright laws.
The group is accusing UMG of engaging in “self-interested and heavy-handed tactics” to block them from exercising their termination rights under copyright law, according to the lawsuit filed Monday (May 19) in a US District Court in New York.
Salt-N-Pepa’s Cheryl James and Sandra Denton are looking to regain control of their early catalog, which features hits like Push It, Let’s Talk About Sex, and Shoop.
MBW has reached out to UMG for comment.
UPDATE, 2pm PT:
A spokesperson for Universal Music Group has issued the following statement: “Salt-N-Pepa’s own legal filings demonstrate the repeated attempts we have made to resolve this matter amicably (including offers to enter into a mediation) ever since the artists served an invalid termination notice.”
“Clearly, the artists’ legal counsel thinks they can use the threat of negative media coverage from the lawsuit to achieve their unreasonable demands.”
UMG spokesperson
The spokesperson added: “Although we had no legal obligation to do so, we still sought to find a way to improve the artists’ compensation and pay them directly – even after they had sold their royalty streams to a third party.
“Clearly, the artists’ legal counsel thinks they can use the threat of negative media coverage from the lawsuit to achieve their unreasonable demands. Despite this, and consistent with our longstanding practice, we remain committed to working towards an amicable resolution.”
Their lawsuit centers on Section 203 of the Copyright Act, which gives creators the right to reclaim their work 35 years after initially transferring the rights, provided they have properly submitted termination notices.
The group said they served termination notices in 2022, “eager to retake full ownership of their art and legacy.” However, they said UMG has refused to acknowledge their validity, claiming the recordings were “works made for hire.”
“UMG’s punitive measure of ‘taking down’ the sound recordings… rather than relinquishing control of them to the rightful owners, means that Plaintiffs were not only denied their rights to the sound recordings but that substantial royalties that would have otherwise been collected from the sound recordings were also lost.”
Salt-N-Pepa’s legal team
According to Salt-N-Pepa’s complaint, UMG retaliated by removing the music from streaming platforms in May 2024.
“UMG’s punitive measure of ‘taking down’ the sound recordings (which, ironically, can be viewed as an acknowledgment by UMG that it no longer had exploitation rights) rather than relinquishing control of them to the rightful owners, means that Plaintiffs were not only denied their rights to the sound recordings but that substantial royalties that would have otherwise been collected from the sound recordings were also lost,” stated the complaint, which can be read in full here.
In April 2025, Salt-N-Pepa terminated the Section 203 agreement “in light of UMG’s apparent unwillingness to reach a resolution.”
“UMG is effectively punishing Plaintiffs for daring to assert their rights by preventing them from reaping any commercial benefit from and/or otherwise exploiting the sound recordings after the effective date of termination set forth on the Notices of Termination,” the 26-page complaint read.
“UMG is effectively punishing Plaintiffs for daring to assert their rights by preventing them from reaping any commercial benefit from and/or otherwise exploiting the sound recordings after the effective date of termination set forth on the Notices of Termination.”
Salt-N-Pepa’s legal team
Salt-N-Pepa’s legal team argued that the duo’s musical catalog is not only extensive but also highly valuable, with royalties generated by their sound recordings generating about $1 million in the past five months in synch licenses alone.
They also claimed that the catalog generates “tens of millions of dollars annually through all forms of exploitation, despite the fact that decades have passed since the release of their major hits and that there have been little to no recent marketing efforts.”
MBW has reached out UMG for comment.
The case marks the latest in a series of lawsuits between legacy artists and major labels over copyright reversion rights.
In 2023, a federal judge in New York refused class-action certification for a lawsuit brought by singer John Waite and other artists, who alleged that UMG, along with Sony Music Entertainment, had refused to allow artists to terminate their copyright assignments under the 35-year rule.
Also in 2023, Warner Music Group settled a lawsuit brought by Scottish band The Jesus and Mary Chain, which alleged that WMG had “refused to comply” with their request to take back their copyrights under Section 203.
The following year, Sony Music settled a similar case brought by singer David Johansen of the New York Dolls, “Southside Johnny” John Lyon, and Paul Collins. The same year, a jury in Florida ruled that members of 2 Live Crew can take back the master copyrights on their music, in a legal dispute with Lil’ Joe Records.
Similar disputes have happened with artists like singer-songwriter Syd Straw, members of bands like The Dickies and The Dream Syndicate, and Paul McCartney.
Music Business Worldwide
