The lawyer said Cher had no standing to collect and pass the money along to Iconic, as requested.
Shes not entitled to a third partys royalties.
Shes not entitled to Iconics royalties.
Cher performs in Los Angeles, CA on April 1, 2024.Kevin Winter/Getty Images/iHeartRadio
Shes not entitled to the royalties that she doesnt own.
In response, Chers lawyer argued that Marys position was illogical considering the courts prior ruling protecting Chers rights.
Cher sought [the royalties].
Shes entitled to them.
And shes obligated to pay them over to Iconic.
Under [opposing] counsels view, what happens to them?
Mary Bono gets them?
That makes absolutely no sense, lawyer Peter Anderson shot back.
They continue to work together to preserve Sonnys legacy, Schacht said.
What happens between Iconic and Mary Bono should be between them and Sonnys four children.
His widow, Mary, assumed control of his estate on behalf of herself and his children.
When Sonnys copyright grants became eligible for termination starting in 2018, Mary sought to invoke the right.
He said Chers rights were protected by California state law, which trumped the federal Copyright Act.
Marys lawyer asked the court to block the admission of Iconics July 2024 letter as evidence.
