A federal choose sided with Atlanta rapper T.I. and his spouse Tameka “Tiny” Harris on Friday, ruling that the Atlanta rapper’s notorious “virginity checks” on his teen daughter and hashish use couldn’t be used as proof at a civil trial now underway in Santa Ana, Calif.
The choice was a key victory for the high-profile couple as they pursue claims that toy large MGA Leisure stole the identify, likeness and commerce costume of their all-female vocal group OMG Girlz when it launched its line of “L.O.L Shock OMG” dolls in the summertime of 2019.
In its failed movement filed Thursday night time, MGA sought the court docket’s permission to indicate jurors clips from the couple’s VH1 actuality present T.I. & Tiny: Buddies & Household Hustle displaying “the household strife” that ensued when T.I., whose authorized identify is Clifford Harris, revealed on a podcast that he accompanied his teen daughter Deyjah to the gynecologist to get affirmation her hymen was nonetheless intact.
The beautiful feedback precipitated widespread outrage on the time they have been made.
“I say, ‘Look, Doc, she don’t experience no horses, she don’t experience no bike, she don’t play no sports activities. Simply examine the hymen, please, and provides me again my outcomes expeditiously,’” T.I. advised the hosts of Women Like Us. He claimed he was okay together with his 15-year-old son being sexually lively, however his daughter was a distinct story.
T.I. later mentioned on an episode of Jada Pinkett Smith’s Crimson Desk Discuss that he had been “joking” partially through the podcast, that the testing wasn’t carried out after his daughter turned 18, and that his feedback had been “misconstrued” and “sensationalized.” He additionally apologized to his daughter.
Earlier than the choose’s ruling Friday, an MGA lawyer argued the toy maker had a proper to indicate the 2020 clips in regards to the “virginity checks” in addition to 2016 social media posts about T.I.’s hashish use as a result of the couple was allowed to indicate jurors their very own movies depicting their household in a constructive mild.
“Opposing counsel has been capable of play video after video after video, not solely of the OMG Girlz, but in addition your complete household wanting good, wanting just like the all-American household, and there are such a lot of movies on the market on social media, so many causes that MGA wouldn’t wish to make a doll line off these of us, that it’s simply making a misimpression for the jury,” MGA lawyer Chase Scolnick argued.
The choose shut him down. He mentioned the 2020 clip in regards to the “virginity check” was off-limits as a result of it got here after the dolls have been launched. He then excluded the movies about hashish, calling them “not related to any problem on this case.”
U.S. District Court docket Choose James V. Selna beforehand excluded proof about T.I.’s legal historical past, saying he needed to keep away from any “sliming” of the events concerned within the civil case.
The choose mentioned Friday that until MGA places a staffer on the stand to say they knew about T.I.’s hashish use and regarded it offensive earlier than the L.O.L. Shock OMG dolls have been launched, he wouldn’t enable the corporate to usher in the rapper’s 2016 Instagram video displaying him strolling with pals in South Africa smoking marijuana.
“To the extent it’s supplied as a proof of their idea that they by no means would have achieved enterprise had they recognized, for instance, that Mr. Harris did marijuana in 2016, nobody has come ahead and mentioned, ‘We knew about that conduct, and we wouldn’t have achieved enterprise.’ For me, that’s the predicate for that kind of proof. So, all of the gadgets within the supply of proof are rejected and excluded,” Choose Selna dominated.
T.I. and Tiny haven’t put a precise determine on the financial damages they’re in search of within the case, however certainly one of their attorneys mentioned throughout opening statements that MGA has made “hundreds of thousands of {dollars}” from the L.O.L. Shock OMG dolls that allegedly infringe on the “identify, picture & commerce costume” of OMG Girlz, the all-girl group Tiny fashioned in 2009 with T.I.’s help.
Tiny testified Thursday and Friday that she believes the dolls “ripped off” the “signature” look of the group, which included varied members earlier than it advanced right into a trio comprising Tiny’s daughter Zonnique Pullins, recognized within the group as “Star,” Bahja Rodriguez, recognized within the group as “Magnificence,” and Breaunna Womanck, recognized within the group as “Babydoll.”
She mentioned the group toured extensively, appeared on TV and have become immediately recognizable for his or her brightly coloured hair, layered clothes and exaggerated equipment.
She mentioned one doll particularly, named Chillax, was a blatant copy of the look the ladies sported on their “All Round The World” tour.
“This doll is just too acquainted. The outfit for me is an enormous, large deal,” she testified. “I wouldn’t be right here if it wasn’t the OMG model, all of the completely different coincidences, the outfit we created. This explicit outfit was designed, created, handmade, if you’ll, for the ladies’ tour.”
Tiny, a member of the multi-platinum ‘90s R&B group Xscape and a Grammy-winning songwriter acknowledged for her contributions to the TLC hit “No Scrubs,” testified that she and the OMG Girlz labored exhausting to create their model and deserved compensation.
“I’m merely stating that this model was ripped off,” she testified.
“This case is about greed. That’s what it’s about. It’s a shakedown,” MGA lawyer Jennifer Keller mentioned in her opening assertion Wednesday, calling T.I. and Tiny’s claims of infringement a “shakedown.”
Keller mentioned brightly coloured hair and clothes have been worn by numerous celebrities, and that MGA launched a line of Bratz dolls in 2005 that featured most of the similar seems claimed by the OMG Girlz.
T.I. is anticipated to take the witness stand when the case resumes subsequent week.