Kesha's Contract Case Summary

THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF KESHA’S CONTRACT

On February 19, 2016, the court has rejected singer Kesha Sebert’s plea on revoking her contract with her producer, Lukasz “Dr. Luke” Gottwald, under Kemosabe Records owned by Sony. The court claims the contract was heavily negotiated and invested; hence, it is arduous for the court to simply revoke the contract. Dr. Luke was accused of ongoing emotional and sexual harassment, and drug abuse against the singer for the ten years she has been working with him. The producer, however, denied the said claims. Because she felt uncomfortable working with her producer, her career has been on hiatus since 2012 — the year of her last promoted album. The news has spiked outrage among the netizens (Bussel, 2016).

Apart from Dr. Luke’s savage intentions and actions towards Kesha, there are other matters to be blamed in the problem. First is

It was also foolish for Kesha to stand before the court without any evidence of her accusations years after the start of the harassment. However, how could anyone measure harassment of an individual and present it to someone else? Experiences are obviously relative. And second is the label and legislature; they were oblivious. In the judge’s defense he said, “You’re asking the court to decimate a contract that was heavily negotiated and typical for the industry. My instinct is to do the commercially reasonable thing” (Bussel, 2016). The statement appeared ruthless for the court to favor the $60 million investor instead of the its receiver’s demand of freedom. The one with more influence will be prioritized in the face of law, leaving the impotent abused. The court does not have any direct power to intervene and break this contract. In addition, Sony could not intervene in Kesha’s contract because they did not directly sign with her (Mosendz,