With only a few singles released in the last twelve months, 2019 can be considered somewhat of an off-year for Detroit rapper Big Sean. The recording artist had been working on himself, getting his anxiety under control before marking a return to music. Sean had previously delayed his tour the year prior, also pushing back his album release so that he can truly get back to his regular self. Now, it would appear as though he’s back and ready to rumble. The full line-up was announced last night for Coachella 2020, with headliners Frank Ocean, Travis Scott and Rage Against The Machine stealing the show. Further down the list of performers is Big Sean, and he’s poised to show the crowd some brand new music.

Reacting to his placement on the festival’s highly-anticipated line-up, Big Sean teased the arrival of his new full-length project before he hits the stage in April. “Guess I got a good deadline for the new album now?” asked the superstar on social media, hinting that it could arrive anytime within the next four months. It’s been such a long time since we heard Big Sean in his element so a new album will definitely be a breath of fresh air for his fans, who have been waiting for years.

Are you looking forward to this?

In October of 2019, rock band Yellowcard took things to the next level in their claim against Juice WRLD. Upon hearing the massive hit that was “Lucid Dreams,” the band noted similar melodic elements to their song “Holly Wood Died.” To address and rectify the issue of alleged copyright infringement, Yellowcard sent out a notice to Juice WRLD’s team, publisher, and record label. However a lack of response left the band “no real choice” but to file an official complaint. Although both tracks sample Sting’s “Shape of My Heart,” Yellowcard is claiming that the pitch and note composition of each song’s first verse is a blatant copy of one another. But they didn’t just stop there. In addition to the melodies chosen, Yellowcard is also claiming the song similarities come from an emo influence they left behind in the mid 2000s when Juice WRLD was growing up. And this is where things have gotten tricky.

According to Yellowcard, prior to his death, Juice WRLD admitted in previous interviews that he fell in love with emo music as a kid. Juice WRLD cited influences from Fall Out Boy and Foo Fighters. And because of so, Yellowcard is claiming that Juice WRLD would have came across “Holly Wood Died” when he began studying the genre. Whether Juice WRLD was subconsciously influenced by the band, or intended on making something reminiscent of it, the court will now look at whether or not the average person can be convinced that the two songs are the same. Two songs being similar enough to fool someone into accidentally picking one, instead of the other, is a valid idea. But suing due to influence is a rather new play in the endless existence of these copyright cases. 

A Juice WRLD tribute mural displayed at Rolling Loud LA, December, 2019 – Scott Dudelson/Getty Images

Throughout the entire history of sound, every artist has been influenced by someone, and every song has leaned on those influences in some way. So in reality, Yellowcard’s claim of influence shouldn’t hold much merit. But if it does, this case will be yet another recent example, in addition to the “Blurred Lines” case, of how convoluted copyright infringement cases have become from the fact that courts can’t distinguish between stealing someone’s work and being influenced by it. “There’s no such thing as originality in music. Everyday ideas come from previous ideas,” musicologist Jeff Peretz says. “There’s a difference between homage and theft. And that’s the fine line that everybody needs to try and get their head around.”

As he’s often called on to compare sheet music in copyright infringement cases, Jeff Peretz has identified the lack of experts and improperly decided cases as the main reason why artists feel comfortable suing for such things. It’s unclear whether Yellowcard or Juice WRLD’s estate will emerge victorious in this case. But in the meantime, we talked Jeff Peretz about the details of the lawsuit as part of a larger piece that fully explains the ins and outs of copyright infringement cases within the context of the music industry. We’re following that up with even more insight, by giving our readers some of the Q&A that transpired with Peretz. 

This interview has been edited down for clarity and length.

HNHH: How do you think the “Blurred Lines” case has changed the music industry?

Jeff Peretz: That’s a good question. And I had a lively discussion with one of my closest friends, Peter Rosenthal of the in-house counsel for Downtown Music Publishing, and he thinks it’s just a blimp on the radar. And I think that it’s a precedent setting, and definitely ramped up people when it comes to running to their lawyers. In past times, people would’ve been like, “Oh that’s cool. You leaned on some of the things we’ve leaned on.” Think about the blues. The chord progressions in the blues is the same. Every blues song has the same structure, and imagine if the first person copy-wrote that structure and that chord progression. Nobody else would be able to make the blues ever again. And so, we can’t limit these kind of things. I don’t know if the “Blurred Lines” case changed the music industry, it just made people a little bit more trigger happy when it comes to claiming theft. And because they’re looking for an easy payout. I don’t know that it actually affected the way that these things get adjudicated because before “Blurred Lines,” you could’ve convince somebody of anything and after “Blurred Lines,” you could convince somebody of anything. I think after “Blurred Lines,” you’re just starting to see more people try. 

These cases are typically expensive. Do you have any idea as to how much copyright cases are to pursue?

It depends on how far it gets. I’d be shooting in the dark by throwing numbers at you, but many of them are brought with the hopes of a quick settlement to keep the profile down and to keep the reputation in tact to not be considered a thief. I would imagine that the amount of money spent on the “Blurred Lines” case would probably be hundreds and thousands of dollars right now, maybe even more. Whereas a quick cease and desist, threatening a lawsuit can be settled pretty quickly and the amount of money will change. Usually what happens though when the cases are settled, is that they’re settled by the person who is being sued, adding the person who’s making the claim, to the copyright so that they get some of the profits moving forward. Whereas in the “Blurred Lines” case, they were given like $7 million dollars in damages too, which was reduced and then added to the copyright moving forward so any future revenue is split. People are even preemptively doing this now. Think about the song “Panini” by Lil Nas X. That little melody comes from a Nirvana song (“In Bloom”), those three notes. They could’ve probably have gotten away with that, but they didn’t even wanna take a chance, so Kurt Cobain was a co-writer on the song before it was even released. They were like, “I don’t want to have any fucking trouble, so just put him on.” I don’t know what the split was but they were like, “I don’t want any trouble whatsoever, so we’re just going to give him a percentage of this song.” If you open Spotify right now and open the songwriting credits, it’s Lil Nas X, it’s Denzel and Dave Borough from Take A Daytrip, and its Kurt Cobain, as if they collaborated in a room. Kurt Cobain has been dead for how many years? But he’s still writing great songs apparently.

This typically seems to happen once a song blows up. Juice WRLD’s “Lucid Dream” got huge, and then Yellowcard decided to sue him. Say that there’s an underground artist as opposed to someone who’s number one on the charts. Are there any requirements surrounding the popularity of an artist?

I would imagine. Half of nothing is nothing. Suing somebody over a song that hasn’t done anything or gone anywhere or made any money, is just kind of senseless. So yeah, and the higher the profile of the song, the more streaming and money it generates. More people come out of the woodwork looking for a piece of that pie. With Lil Nas X, it’s interesting to think like, he had the number one song for however many weeks he was up there. So it almost goes without saying that whatever he dropped next, was going to get some play, right? So I would imagine the legal team that was involved with the writer splits on “Panini” was like, “There’s no way this song is going to go under the radar. So if somebody can make the claim, that it sounds like Nirvana, we need to get ahead of that.” Whereas if that song was written by two unknown artists in some unknown place and it came out and had to try to compete on the charts with its own merit, without the previous song of that artist being a number one hit, I don’t know that it would’ve been handled the same way. I would imagine that they would be less concerned about adding Kurt Cobain as a copyright if it were just an unknown artist who was just trying to make their way out there. To me, one of the coolest things about that song is that it’s familiar. Rhythmically, there are more syllables than the Kurt Cobain song, so there’s no rule that says three notes is good and four notes is bad. But could I walk into a record store and say there’s a song I want to hear and sing that rhythm, and they sell me “Panini” when I’m really trying to buy “In Bloom”? Could I be fooled into thinking I was buying the wrong thing? So apparently, the legal team for Lil Nas X and Take A Daytrip thought it could, so they got out ahead of it and did the copyright. Which as far as the story goes, makes them cool because it makes them fair and understand and be honest. It makes them better than thieves. They borrowed that little piece that fit great into their collage, but they paid for it. That’s kind of like standup behavior. Whether or not it would’ve been or could’ve been the grounds for a copyright infringement sue remains to be seen because they preempted that. But for other people in certain circumstances, it could’ve been those three notes. It heightened the awareness of that kind of stuff. 

Considering how most people don’t try to attack until the song gets big, is there a time frame in which people can sue?

No! “Got to Give It Up” came out in 1977 and it was a number one hit. So no, there are no statute of limitations on it. I just worked on a case for Bob Geldof from the Boomtown Rats on his song “I Don’t Like Mondays.” That song was written in the early ’70s and the piano player is now claiming that he wrote the main riff. They settled that at court in the U.K. The laws are a little bit different there, but it’s the same thing. It begs the question, where fuck have you been for 30 years? Now all of a sudden you’re saying you wrote this, but why now? But “Blurred Lines” came out in different circumstances. It came out when it came out but it leaned on these tropes from the song which came out in ’77. So there can’t really be any kind of time limit. Technically, here’s where the time limit comes in; for copyright, you own your song until 75 years after the death of the composer, that’s when the copyright goes into public domain. So that’s the time limit. If I want to literally, re-record “Shoop” by Salt-N-Pepa, I have to wait until all of the writers have died. And from the last writer on that song, I have to wait 75 more years and I can literally re-record it note for note and reclaim it as my own. But by that point, it’s like a “Happy Birthday.” It’s part of the fabric of the culture. No one really owns that anymore. 

So in Juice WRLD’s case, one of the newest claims is that Juice WRLD would have been subconsciously influenced by Yellowcard’s music. And he would have heard “Holly Wood Died” growing up. Is that a valid defense in these kinds of cases?

It doesn’t matter if he’s heard it. I have a feeling that what they’re arguing is going to be based off of the chord progression, which is not copyrightable and I can debunk it right now. That’s the whole precedence that was set with the George Harrison case. It doesn’t matter if they’ve had access to hearing it or not. It’s if there are similarities in the melodic arch, and the notes that they’ve chosen on each chord are the same note. “Lucid Dreams” has many more syllables happening in it, so it’s not going to look the same. But to your first question, it doesn’t matter if they’ve had access to it. They could’ve never heard it in their lives. It sounds like it’s similar enough, but they would either have to settle or they can be found guilty of infringement. 

In copyright cases, there’s a lurking idea of “subconsciously plagiarizing.” We talked about influence earlier, but every artist might not realize that they’re utilizing a previous influence. How would someone defend that claim in the court?

You don’t, it doesn’t matter. Because the intention has nothing to do with it. When you set out to do it, you did it willingly. Or you had no idea or it came to you in a dream or you grew up with a bathroom and you’ve never heard any other music in your life and the first song you wrote turned out to be “I Want To Hold Your Hand” by The Beatles, coincidentally… it doesn’t matter. But does it line up? So yeah, sometimes that’s probably the way it happens more often than not. Your instincts guide you to something you’ve heard before.The way that human beings appreciate and fuck with music, is that when you go to a show, you want to hear something familiar and see something you’ve never seen before. Those are the golden rules of putting on a great show. People want to go and jump up and down, and sing along. They want to have their mind blown by the theatrics on the stage, not the opposite. They don’t want to hear something new for the first time in a show and then see something they’ve seen everyday of their lives. They want to hear something familiar and see something they’ve never seen. So when we’re creating, our instincts rely on something we’ve heard before and that’s the way that we develop what it is that we’re doing. Then it’s how far away we can get from our influences that determine when people people consider us to be innovative. Innovators assimilate their influences and make something that gets further away from them.

I was reading your piece on Vulture, and I saw that T.I. got off the hook because he wasn’t a major figure in the creation of “Blurred Lines.” He just came in and did his thing. Who’s typically held accountable in these situations?

The songwriters. T.I.’s contribution was that he spit a verse on an already created piece of music. I don’t know that there’s a hard and pressed rule about this, but in that particular case, that’s the way it was looked at. They had this song, it sounded like “Blurred Lines,” and whether T.I. came in or not, it didn’t change anything about how it all kind of went down. He is on the copyright, because of the words that he wrote and put on top of the beat which could’ve been any beat. So he was kind of let off the hook in that respect. I think rightfully so, he had nothing to do with the argument that this song sounds like the other song. Robin Thicke was saying “Oooohhh!” left and right, which is a big trope of Marvin Gaye’s. He was using that, but no one can own that. Yes, it’s going to remind you of this other song, but its not against the law. T.I.’s part of that was that he was just a guest rapper who spit a verse on top of the already predetermined beat. And whatever the beat was, it would’ve been the same verse. 

And my last question is, I remember you saying that these kinds of cases can limit creativity and stifle innovation. If it’s starting to become such a sensitive thing, how can artists navigate without crossing any legal boundaries? Are there any solutions? 

We teach a class at the Clive Davis Institute called recycling pop music, which is just about that. And it studies all the way back to classical music, going back hundreds of years with great composers like Bartok who would go and take the folk melodies that they heard in villages in Austria and Hungary, and then co-op them and turn them into these grand classical music pieces. So the idea of recycling and copying is like fundamental to the creation of music. So knowing when you are conceptually borrowing when you’re borrowing for style, and when you are literally using the idea of another individual. Once again, those lines are blurred but there’s really no short answer for that. Its a lifetime of work to understand when you are…And it also comes with the intention. If I’m intending to fool you, thinking I wrote something that I know that I didn’t write, then that’s plagiarizing. If I accidentally come across the same thing, it’s tried out, and then it’s decided that it’s the same thing, then shame on me and I write a check and we move on. If I love Radiohead and write some of the same chords or some of the same drum patterns or tempos, or I sing falsetto and I’m developing my own thing and using some of the same colors that they use, no artist can copyright blue. But if I want to paint like Picasso’s blue period, I’m going to use a lot of blue, right? So if you’re using it to develop and come up with your own thing, it’s one thing. If you’re actively trying to fool somebody, it’s another. But that is the job of an artist. You can ask a thousand artists, and they’ll tell you that they want to be original. Good luck, because there’s no such thing. But it’s about how much distance you can get from your influences. If you think about Oasis, it’s two clicks away from The Beatles. And so, people find them derivative and some people love them for that, and some people hate them for that. But they don’t steal the actual notes, beats, and chords from The Beatles. They just sound a lot like them and they have the same haircuts and shit. You take something like the Wu-Tang Clan. They’re 10 clicks away from the Sugar Hill gang, even though they’re both using instrumental beats that came from songs before them. And they’re putting words on top of them in rhythm. So it’s how far away from your influences can you get. No one would ever look at the Wu-Tang Clan as trying to be Sugar Hill Gang. Whereas people would look at Oasis as if they’re trying to be The Beatles. So it’s how far enough can you get, that determines how “innovative or original”? But the reality is, they’re relying on the same techniques and the same tropes. 

YNW Melly (and his entire family) are confident that the rapper will be coming home from jail soon. For the last twelve months, the rising Florida figure has been locked up for the alleged double murder of his two friends. We have received several updates regarding YNW Melly, who released a new album from behind bars a few months ago. The artist definitely isn’t having any trouble writing new material, writing tons of melodies and lyrics in his free time and even pitching some ideas to his peers. In a new video shared by Future, it appears as though the two are already working on a potential collaboration for when Melly gets out of jail, should that even happen.

Posting a portion of their phone call last night, Future sat in his chauffeured Rolls-Royce and listened to the sweet sounds of YNW Melly singing in his ear. Discussing the new music that the 20-year-old has been working on, Future asked to hear some bars from a song Melly wrote where he references all the money he’s blown on his lawyer. Hendrix sits back and smiles as he listens to the young man reciting the hook, clearly excited about what he can lay down on the track. Whatever they end up working on, it looks like Melly and Future are going to be hitting us with some vibes once the former has access to a recording studio.

Are you on the “Free Melly” train or do you think he should get hard time?

Top Dawg Entertainment fans have been awaiting a big year from the acclaimed label, who likely has their hands full when it comes to scheduling. After all, we're looking at expected releases from Reason, Ab-Soul, Isaiah Rashad, Kendrick Lamar, and SZA. Seeing as we're only a few days into the new decade, it's uncertain how the chips will ultimately fall. Luckily the job falls to Punch, who seems to have already set the wheels in motion. 

Emma McIntyre/Getty Images

Though the finer details elude us for the time being, SZA recently confirmed that her upcoming project is indeed slated for a 2020 release. In fact, there might even be a date -- though the singer has opted to keep that one close to her chest. Now, it's not for us to raise our expectations prematurely, but the time for a new SZA album certainly feels right. Her last project was CTRL in June of 2017, and it wouldn't be surprising to see them looking to double down on the magic formula.

Are you excited to hear some new music from SZA? Perhaps we'll even get to hear her collaboration with Megan Thee Stallion, which she recently teased in late December.

The past year in music brought with it a plethora of new faces and milestones, some of them more applause-worthy and conspicuous than others. Given that we’re still very much in the early transformative stages of the streaming era, understanding the shifts that are happening now will provide a window into the future. With all that said, let’s take a look at how the music industry is evolving as we head into the new decade.

Going Global

Beyond hip hop’s success in the U.S., where it’s now the biggest music genre in terms of total consumption, it has rapidly grown into a worldwide mainstream commodity. The unlimited connectivity of the internet has exponentially sped up this globalization and has amounted to substantial revenue opportunities. Expanded operations and an influx of capital on the African continent, as well as in Asia and the Middle East, are beginning to transform once dormant markets into legitimate players in the music economy, with the potential to not only reach billions of new users, but also expose more localized talent to a wider audience. Democratization and collaboration are the cornerstones of modernity, and hip hop’s forging of international bonds has the power to crack all manner of charts. The past year alone delighted fans with the mainstream arrival of acts ranging from Billie Eilish to BTS to Burna Boy, as well as increased visibility surrounding the UK’s effervescent grime scene and Asia’s experimental music fireworks.

A Post-Genre Era

Lil Nas X and 6lack attend the 2019 GQ Men of the Year After Party – Randy Shropshire/Getty Images 

Music journalists and industry gatekeepers have long had an unhealthy obsession with pigeonholing artists into categories. Yet thanks to the unfettered expansion of hip hop’s cultural footprint, diversification and hybridization were in full bloom in 2019, a year in which the stars aligned for several of music’s boldest and brightest trailblazers. None were more distinguished than Lil Nas X, who marched (spurred cowboy boots in tow) to the gates of Billboard to take on the charts giant, where he ultimately emerged unscathed with the longest running No. 1 song in U.S. chart history. The inescapable rise of “Old Town Road” would not have been possible without forward-thinking curatorial outlets like TikTok and Triller that allow users everywhere to repurpose and share their music. Such platforms have facilitated in breaking down barriers between genres through their capacity for virality and fueling of “music as memes” all manner of remixes, edits, and mashups. Prejudices and preconceived notions continue to crumble beneath the blossoming conception of music as a fluid frontier, capable of supporting the lush sonic smoothies of Koffee, the stylized he-loves-me-not musings of Tyler, The Creator, and the drill-based provocations of Pop Smoke.

More Breakout Success For Female Emcees

Kehlani & Megan Thee Stallion attend Rihanna‘s Diamond Ball, 2019 – Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

One female emcee after another grabbed the public’s attention in 2019, whether it was Lizzo with her triumphant theatrics on “Truth Hurts,” Saweetie and City Girls with their call-and-response anthems, or Megan Thee Stallion and her devoted Hot Girl Summer “hotties.” Others like Noname, Rapsody, Rico Nasty, and Tierra Whack further contributed to the astounding resurgence of women in hip hop. In fact, 2019 “yielded the highest total of (female) rappers making their mark on the Billboard Hot 100 this decade,” a statistic that speaks to just how electrifying the conversation has become in recent years. While there’s no denying the outsized impact of women in hip hop over the course of the genre’s history, it finally feels as if the narrative is beginning to shift to appropriately honor and celebrate both the veterans who paved the way and the new faces who are preserving and building upon their legacy. 

Social Media’s Cult Of Personality

If Tekashi 6ix9ine’s dramatic rise and fall taught us anything, it’s that self-made stars and precocious personalities are hoisted by the masses of the social media age. Universal access to smartphones, and by association social media, is empowering artists to keep pace with their audiences at a previously unprecedented rate. Now more than ever, artists are encouraged to develop bold branding strategies and imagery that sticks, and they’re choosing to connect with listeners directly rather than through the squeaky clean lens of their handlers. All of this has produced a completely new and refurbished pop landscape in which music makers are firmly in the driver’s seat when it comes to nurturing media presence, while labels in the traditional sense of the word have resigned themselves to a more hands-off role as financial overseers and talent investors.

The Intersection Of Videos Games, Online Entertainment, & Live Music

Blueface performing at Rolling Loud LA edition 2019 – Photo by Evie Hoffman for HNHH exclusively

Virtual reality and live streaming are tech spaces with endless possibilities, and they’re aiding artists in orchestrating massive cultural moments that unfold in real time. In February, Marshmello’s historic Fortnite concert brought in upwards of 10.7 million live “attendees” in what could very well prove to be the tip of the iceberg for virtual viewership. Meanwhile, 800,000 users tuned in to the YouTube premiere of Ariana Grande’s “thank u, next” while over 600,000 scampered to Twitch to watch Ninja and Drake take a crack at duos in the aforementioned battle royale. Rolling Loud, “the largest hip-hop festival in the world,” boasted a throng 60,000 strong at its inaugural New York set this past fall, and with plans to take the show overseas, there’s no telling what the ceiling might be for high-end livestreaming experiences. Who knows: VR capabilities that enable Adam Levine and Jonah Hill to share courtside seats at a live Lakers game could translate into groundbreaking new avenues of engagement for those looking to snag virtual concert tickets and take in the action up close while still in their pajamas.

Riding The “Content” Tidal Wave

Content diversification on streaming services was never a matter of if but a matter of when. Investment in exclusive and original content is well underway: we’ve already seen Spotify take ambitious steps to monopolize the realm of podcasts with their purchase of Gimlet & Anchor, and Pandora established a Podcast Genome similar to the one that powers its internet radio service. Given how scalable technology has become, it’s no surprise that multi-format creative agencies are thriving. The crossover between music and gaming has taken video outlets YouTube and Twitch by storm, while music-based platforms such as COLORS and Lyrical Lemonade are creating compelling blueprints for the future and re-envisioning their role in the space along the way. This entrepreneurial spirit has resulted in the convergence of different areas of media, whether that be music, fashion, film, etc. Rihanna’s Fenty Beauty, Action Bronson’s “Fuck That’s Delicious,” Offset’s partnership with esports organization FaZe Clan, and Drake’s involvement in the revival of Top Boy are but a few example of artists re-envisioning themselves as entertainers and content creators.

No End In Sight For Album Tug Of War

Augmented by the boon of major platform playlists, the discussion surrounding the fluctuation of the album format has been defined by two distinct schools of thought. On one hand, homogenized and inoffensive music devoid of creative merit has engendered passive consumption on a massive scale, as vastly popular algorithms continue to dictate the prosperity of bloated releases. It’s a trend that isn’t going anywhere: lengthy tracklists do numbers, and artists will likely continue to submit desperate, long-winded bids as a means of gaming the system. Elsewhere, more succinct and palatable releases, most notably those comprising Kanye West’s G.O.O.D. Music rollout of summer 2018, have garnered equal attention if for different reasons. All of this is to say that both ends of the spectrum are finding success in the pursuit of replayability, further bolstering the eternal struggle between quality and quantity.

An Appetite For Conceptually-Conceived Music

The Trump-born melange of crisis and confusion has opened the door for artists to explore ideas of identity and rich, politically-tinged narratives. It’s an environment ripe for socially-literate creatives looking to voice their anger and frustrations with the state of the world. Ambitious vessels such as Janelle Monae’s Dirty Computer and Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp a Butterfly are the audio equivalent of an escape from modernity’s fractured state, and their success in blurring the lines of fiction and reality underlines a demand for forging deeper connections with artists and the environments they weave.

What do you predict for 2020? Let us know in the comments.

If you liked this, check out:

The Singles Era Is Upon Us (And What It Means For Music Consumption)

Collision Course: How Musical Independence Has Ignited A Streaming War

How Leaked Music Has Evolved In The Streaming Age

We’ve been waiting ages for Playboi Carti‘s new album Whole Lotta Red. The Atlanta mumble rapper is looking to follow up the success of Die Lit with even more fire and, judging from the leaks and the snippets, fans think he can very well drop another hit. Along the way to its eventual release, we have experienced a few speed bumps, most notably in the form of false hopes on the side of the fans. Playboi Carti has been teasing the arrival of the record for months and, oftentimes, his “announcements” paint the picture that it could be coming out in a matter of hours. Uploading a new hint on Instagram last night, people rushed over to a website that Carti had written into his caption, only to be met with information about filmmaking.

Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images

Playboi Carti decided to show off his Rick Owens outfit one time, getting people riled up in the comments over his caption, which read: “vampire weekend . red.com.” Considering the fact that his upcoming album is titled Whole Lotta Red, people were anticipating some brand new music upon visiting the site. However, they stumbled on a website peddling speciality cameras for filmmakers, not at all resembling a new Playboi Carti album. Oh well… I guess the wait must go on a little longer.

Do you think WOR will release this year?

It’s not even noon EST and the antics have already reached critical mass. It all started after 50 Cent decided to start picking on French Montana over a Bugatti’s mileage, a petty feud that soon escalated into a full-fledged Instagram war. This morning, French decided to retaliate with what can only be described as “the kiss of death,” which is to say, photoshopping two men into a passionate embrace. By the time 50 Cent logged onto IG to plug #lecheminduroi,” it was already too late. An edited image of himself kissing his friend and former label boss Eminem was making the rounds. 

Bryan Steffy/Getty Images

It didn’t matter that the picture originally featured 50 Cent kissing Nicole Scherzinger of The Pussycat Dolls. The narrative steamrolled forward, a hip-hop variant of Star-crossed lovers. Of course, many immediately saw through the ruse, opting to stand loyal to Fif and Eminem‘s platonic partnership. Yet others found the exchange particularly hilarious, especially considering Fif’s own use of cyberbully-esque Photoshops. Lest we forget, the nude “Busta Rhymes” forever branded into the depths of our psyches. 

With 50 having yet to respond, French took a moment to declare victory over his opponent with another age-old strategy: kill em’ with kindness. Rapping along to Fif’s “How We Do” verse, French can barely contain his glee. Check out his celebratory antics below, and weigh in — did French Montana prove the chosen one after all? Or did he make a fatal mistake by not only poking one bear, but dragging another, deadlier bear into the mix? 

Jay Electronica is, what some may call, an elusive gentleman. Distinguished in the art of lyricism but elusive as true love all the same, Jay Electronica's record-breakingly sparse release-rate has led to no shortage of frustrated jokes at his expense. And yet, his lyrical pedigree remains so lofty that he remains an unchallenged authority on the topic of bars. When he offers a co-sign, there's validity there that not every emcee carries. Today, Jay came through to offer up an opinion on Big Sean's pen game, a topic that has been contested time and again.

Vivien Killilea/Getty Image

Though Sean Don has occasionally been branded "corny" by his critics, many of whom find his punchline style veers into "dad joke" territory,  Jay Electronica feels differently. "To me, Big Sean got one of the most underrated pens of this time," he writes, a seemingly unprompted burst of praise. 

Perhaps he was listening to "Control" and got to reminiscing, quietly bonding over the fact that Kendrick essentially highjacked the entire song. Perhaps he simply threw on Dark Sky Paradise and really honed in on the bars. In any case, it's a welcome gesture from Electronica, and further validation that Big Sean is holding it down for the lyricists in the game. Check out the tweet below, and cross your fingers for some new music from Jay Electronica -- perhaps even featuring Big Sean. 

DaBaby has experienced incredible success this year alone and his loyalty reflects in his dedication to his fans and loved ones. Stunna 4 Vegas is one of DaBaby’s day ones who is also signed to his label. And since he’s come up, criticism has flared around the true reasons why Stunna 4 Vegas is relevant today. We have all seen multiple interviews with DaBaby where Stunna sat by, offering input from time to time, but always closeby. It is thus obvious that the two have an amicable bond. Yet, fans appear to think otherwise. While a lot of folks continuously offers support to both artists, many feel Stunna 4 Vegas would not be relevant had it not been for DaBaby’s fame.

In a recent interview with VLADtv, DaBaby’s protegee offered input on the hate he’s been getting. He highlighted: “I see it a lot. If I comment on Baby’s shit, his fans just attack me,” he admits. “They be like “n**** stop dickriding,” and I’m like what?” he then laughs. “N*** signed me, bruh. He changed my life.” He spoke on the comments being irrelevant to him as it would only truly matter if DaBaby was the one saying it. Stunna 4 Vegas states he owes his life to DaBaby for signing up and that it is nothing more than that. Furthermore, he appears excited to make his own way in the rap game through his individuality as an artist.