JERRY HELLER SUES DR. DRE, CUBE AND 'COMPTON' PRODUCERS FOR DEFAMATION

[abusive]

10/30/2015 10:38 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
EXCLUSIVE
1030-jerry-heller-dr-dre-TMZ-01Jerry Heller is suing everyone connected with "Straight Outta Compton," alleging the movie defamed him ... and he wants $110 MILLION minimum.
Heller has just filed suit against Ice Cube, Dr. Dre, the Estate of Eazy-E, NBC Universal and others, claiming the portrayal of him in the movie was false and damaging.
Heller says he was portrayed as "the bad guy" and "a sleazy manager who took advantage of Eazy-E, Dr. Dre and Ice Cube." And he says there are other lies in the movie, including:
-- He withheld a $75k check from Ice Cube
-- He fraudulently induced Dre and Cube to sign unfavorable contracts
-- He enjoyed lobster brunches while the contracts were being signed
-- He was fired by Eazy-E
He claims he never gave permission to use his likeness and he wants profits from the movie as well because NBC sold tickets off his back.  He also claims producers used his book without permission for pivotal scenes, including the one where Suge Knight strong-armed Eazy-E into signing away his rights to Death Row.
And this is funny ... he says producers didn't even bother to give his character a fake name, like "Gary Beller."
You'll recall Heller sat in the front row with his lawyers when the movie premiered.
He's suing for $35 million in compensatory damages and at least $75 mil in punitives ... plus all profits from the flick.


Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2015/10/30/jerry-heller-sues-dr-dre-cube-straight-outta-compton-defamation/#ixzz3q5Z58GDD
http://www.tmz.com/2015/10/30/jerry-heller-sues-dr-dre-cube-straight-outta-compton-defamation/

[MOBNigga06]

Well, I think he has a strong case. Most of the discrepancies between real life and the movie were completely arbitrary. There was no creative need to misrepresent history - the story would have been fine if they simply represented things as they were.

Listening to B.G. Knocc Out's interviews on VladTV makes you realize that the estate of Eazy E could also sue the movie for defamation. Portraying Eazy as broke? Making it look like he got beat up? No need to do either of those things, unless you're Dr. Dre and you still secretly hate the man a little bit.

[abusive]

Well, I think he has a strong case. Most of the discrepancies between real life and the movie were completely arbitrary. There was no creative need to misrepresent history - the story would have been fine if they simply represented things as they were.

Listening to B.G. Knocc Out's interviews on VladTV makes you realize that the estate of Eazy E could also sue the movie for defamation. Portraying Eazy as broke? Making it look like he got beat up? No need to do either of those things, unless you're Dr. Dre and you still secretly hate the man a little bit.

I agreed up until the Dre comment. I really believe that this is Cube's doing and that Cube is the one who still hates Heller. I've seen the hate for Heller with No Vaseline, I've never seen it coming from Dre. Also, as I said somewhere else, Cube is in the movie business, not Dre.

 I think Suge has a case as well because people keep coming out and saying that Suge never beat up Eazy. It's crazy to think that Suge kilt someone over how he was portrayed in the film.

[Sccit]

The backlash might end up doin every1 involved in this movie dirty

[Jimmy H.]

Listening to B.G. Knocc Out's interviews on VladTV makes you realize that the estate of Eazy E could also sue the movie for defamation. Portraying Eazy as broke? Making it look like he got beat up? No need to do either of those things, unless you're Dr. Dre and you still secretly hate the man a little bit.

  No, they cannot sue.  They are actually part of the lawsuit that Heller is filing.  They were given the same kind of creative license as Dre and Cube, meaning Eazy's estate had to sign off on how Eric was portrayed in the movie.  They are also producers on the project.  Heller is suing Dre, Cube, and Eazy's estate for more or less, all of the profits earned from this film.  It's all just Hollywood bullshit.  He wants a piece of the action.  He's starting with a ridiculous amount so when they settle out of court, the price will be higher.  It will basically end up being him getting a payout to shut the fuck up and move on. 

[Jimmy H.]

The one case where he does have some grounds is the use of accounts of events from his book.  There are stories/conversations with Eazy that only he had the knowledge of and I don't think you can use information like that without crediting the source. 

[Blasphemy]

10/30/2015 10:38 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
EXCLUSIVE

1He withheld a $75k check from Ice Cube
2 He fraudulently induced Dre and Cube to sign unfavorable contracts
3 He enjoyed lobster brunches while the contracts were being signed
4 He was fired by Eazy-E
5 He also claims producers used his book without permission for pivotal scenes, including the one where Suge Knight strong-armed Eazy-E into signing away his rights to Death Row.
And this is funny ... he says producers didn't even bother to give his character a fake name, like "Gary Beller."
You'll recall Heller sat in the front row with his lawyers when the movie premiered.
He's suing for $35 million in compensatory damages and at least $75 mil in punitives ... plus all profits from the flick.

1. That story has been around for fucking ages and Ice Cube has stated that for fucking years, it's already been in the public record at the very least as a alleged version of events
2. That was never depicted in the film, all his character stated was that the others already signed there contracts.
3. That's completely debatable and unprovable that it did or didn't happen in either case.
4. Everyone around ruthless at the time has stated he was fired, never once was it stated he just left. the where was changed (everyone stated it happened at the company office, not his home)
5. Eazy E being strong armed by Suge has been a matter of Public record since he filed the lawsuit in the early 90s, and Won, it's been talked about in multiple Documentaries and interviews, what was depicted during the confrontation is debatable, and Suge would possibly have a suit however he himself was not shown beating Eazy E but a by stander. Jerry has no knowledge of what happened during that meeting outside of what Eazy and Suge and anyone else involved has stated.
6. Hollywood has done this multiple times in order to avoid legal stuff like this, however Jerry Heller's work with N.W.A and the entire story was Completely documented and already a matter of the public record through various means (Documentary's, News, Interviews, Magazines), and when it involves multiple people depicting there point of view they are allowed to portray the events as they perceived them and given he can be considered  a public figure dude to his own means (the book, the interviews he has given) so his portrayal is legal.

The only thing he could sue is possibly slander, however if Ruthless kept its Financial records to show he did in fact embezzle from the company and didn't pursue charges, then the film was a accurate portrayal of a events from a witnesses point of view and his case has no merit.

Honestly I hope Universal, The Eazy E Estate and Ice Cube fight and crush this fucker, simply for the fact he's had a chip on his shoulder  since the god damn 90s and hasn't let it go. I saw a interview were he's stated he's forgiving the people who threaten him but not Ice Cube simply because he called him a Jew, not a kike, not a oven dodger, but a Jew. all it shows is he's a hypocrite who only give a fuck about getting rich off the group and not what rap and the group was about, and his anger is in the same vein as all those morons who protested N.W.A and the 90s rappers.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

I don't know that he has much of a case.  Because actually... they didn't even do him that dirty in the movie.   That's the thing.  And there are witnesses like Bone—to Jerry being fired by Eazy.   And the contract thing with Cube, and whether or not he at Lobster—is kind of splitting hairs.  Because clearly there was a 75,000 dollar check out there and Cube just didn't even end up signing it.  I didn't even really seem him withhold anything from Cube in the movie.  Also, Heller can't really argue that Dre wasn't underpaid, because clearly he was underpaid.  The movie never painted Jerry as stealing money from them, it just showed that Dre was underpaid, and even that point wasn't really made emphatically.  

So I think the simple fact is that they didn't really drag Jerry through the mud in the movie.  As much as he would like to believe that they did, they really didn't.  Did they give him a fair shake?  Probably not, because Cube is a bit of a racist and probably still hates Jerry... but they didn't exactly drag his name through the mud either.   So I hope he loses the case.

This is bullshit that all these people are trying to get money off of this film.  You got Suge thinking he deserves a cut.  Then Suge goes and kills some people over it, and then next thing you know their families are making million dollars worth of wrongful death lawsuits against Dre and Cube thinking they deserve a cut as well.... this is all bullshit.  Suge is the one that killed them, and Dre and Cube had nothing to do with it.  

The most ridiculous of all is Suge thinking he deserves a cut... hasn't Dre made that dude enough money in his life?   Look what he has accomplished without Dre.  He ran the company into the ground and spent most of the years in prison.

[Blasphemy]

Reading through the suit and my personal beliefs on em. Also for people who don't wanna read the document

Page 6 Line 8: The screen play allegedly being sold behind his back could be countered that because the events depicted in the film are based on real life, said events would have to be reflected regardless of script origins, and could possibly be countered that another, completely unrelated screenplay was produced with the same events and "characters" dude to the events being depicted are again real life events.

Page 6 Line 13: States he did not give his permission for his likeness to be used Once again he is a Public figure, and the events in question are from the view of the people around him.

Page 6 Line 35: Jerry states he didn't receive any compensation and was not contacted for involvement. Again the film is depicting the point of view of the individuals who were around him and there view (N.W.A, Tomica, Possibly other ruthless Acts)

Page 6 Line 20: Jerry States his depiction was false and negative resulting in his name being disgraced. Again the events depicted in the film have already been public record for a long time, the only possible standing is the conversations in the scenes that include his characters Reaction to No Vaseline, his Rebuttal to Eazy E Firing him, The Lobster scene, Him talking about getting back to work during scene in which they watch Rodyney King. IMO the only scene in which is debatable is Eazy E firing him, all the other scenes depict him infront of other people (hence there view of events) however given his firing was at Ruthless Office it's possible he was fired in front of people. That would be universals best line of defense, of course you open up to a perjury charge if caught lying and again some Scenes can not actually be proven true or false by either party due to lack of recordings.

Page 6 Line 23 to Page 7 Line 8 - Talks his portrayal as the bad guy in the film, his telling Ice Cube not to get a lawyer, and him hiding financial information from the group as well as paying himself before the group. The meeting between him and cube is here say and can't be proven on either side, Him not giving Ice Cube money is a matter of public record when Ice Cube sued for royalties (and won), as for him hiding the money is depending on all parties involved and there memories of events.As for him paying himself before the group, that wasn't really depicted in the film from what I saw, you could argue him having money in the film before N.W.A could already be money he owned from being in the music business before hand, and not necessarily from N.W.A's Profits.

Page 7 Line 9 - Allegedly during a settlement Tomica signed a non-disparagement clause during Jerry's original suit with ruthless in the settlement. This prevents her from saying anything negative about him, and he's saying she broke contract because his depiction in the film. Universal can state any depictions involving him was from N.W.A's point of view, and her involvement was strictly for the Eazy E Characterization.

Page 7 Line 13 - stealing from his book, again depends on what exactly he claims they cribbed from his book.

Page 7 Line 16 - List moments of when they get harassed in front of the studio right after Dr. Dre's baby momma leaves and Eazy E's confrontation with knight.  Said first moment involves N.W.A and again can be said was from there perception of events, and The second moment stated was again a matter of public record after the original lawsuit from the 90s. He keeps the legalities open by stating that it was not exclusively these two scenes.

Page 7 Line 22 - basically he wants more money if the film grosses more.

Page 13 Line 3 - LMAO that's the line with "Garry Beller"  with the following lines talking about his privacy rights, Honestly from what I remember in the film he  was only once depicted alone and that was with the blood outside his House any other time was a depiction involving other people (point of view once again). The firing scene might come into play, but again depends on the real thing.

page 15 Line 13 - is part of the settlement with tomica, involving the non-Disparaging agreement, that explains why we never heard either of em talk shit to each other, because legally they can't without violating the agreement.

page 16 Nine cause of Action - So apparently the original screen play was based on a Oral agreement, that's pretty bad, because the two writers can claim together what he is saying is false, and could state Jerry was a mere consultant/source of inspiration for the events in the original 4 Screen plays, and not commissioned, unless they have financial, emails, or paper documentation proving they were commissioned by him.

Page 18 - Eleventh cause of action - He's saying they took his book and 4 screen plays to make the film. Again because it's based on reality and has multiple peoples point of views on such a short period of events (coming together, the single tour, the beef, the break up, and flash forward into the late 90s with Eazy's death) I doubt he'll get this, unless they can link extremely specific events from his book that were private.

Page 24 Exhibit A - I JUST READ THIS SHIT LOL IT'S THE EXACT ARGUMENT UNIVERSAL IS GONNA USE TO WIN. It's basically his legal protection so he couldn't get sued from the book, Universal has the same type of legal text at the end of the movie (just like every movie and even some video games have had before). The film is not a documentary, it's a bio-pic which is a depiction of real life events dramatized for entertainment. We've seen it time and time again.

Page 29 Continuation of Exhibit B - part of the original settlement with Tomica. Holy fuck Heller got paid 2,250,00 Dollars plus interest despite his original suit being dismissed, and unable for either to sue in the future unless breach of contract. However each side pays there own attorneys fees and cost. Honestly if this was the settlement I wonder what the fucker wanted, but given what he's suing for now, It was probably a lot more.

[DeeezNuuuts83]

The problem is that it's hard for Jerry Heller and his legal team to actually prove there were damages.

Whether the stuff was accurate or not, he has already been painted as a money grubber by both Cube and Dre when they both left Ruthless when they did.  So it's not like people dropped a bomb on him that is suddenly making him look a certain way.

Additionally, his life is not impacted at the moment... on top of the guy being old and probably not going to be around in the next decade, it's not as if he is going to lose revenue because of this, or that his reputation is negatively affected to the point where he is being attacked or deals are being withdrawn.

[Blasphemy]

The problem is that it's hard for Jerry Heller and his legal team to actually prove there were damages.

Whether the stuff was accurate or not, he has already been painted as a money grubber by both Cube and Dre when they both left Ruthless when they did.  So it's not like people dropped a bomb on him that is suddenly making him look a certain way.

Additionally, his life is not impacted at the moment... on top of the guy being old and probably not going to be around in the next decade, it's not as if he is going to lose revenue because of this, or that his reputation is negatively affected to the point where he is being attacked or deals are being withdrawn.

He's grabbing at straws, he can't prove any of his current business dealings are being hurt by the film, nor his public perception because this is all stuff from the 80s/90s it's old news already. It's already been established within the history of rap, news, and legal hearings. The lawsuit involving Ice Cube in the 80s, combined with the lawsuit of Dr. Dre in the 90s already established this history of were he and ruthless allegedly did not provide proper compensation. They are a matter of public record, and if the case goes to trail, the documents and transcripts of the original 2 lawsuits are going to be entered into the hearing to show that his characterization within the film wasn't falsified, but "merely inspired" by the legal histories he was involved in.

Honestly the only reason I believe ruthless didn't have Jerry arrested for his embezzlement is because the idea of a hardcore rap label which had one of the most gangster ass groups of all time, who's known for saying Fuck the Police wouldn't be good publicity for them. Quick question did they ever file a civil suit on him for the embezzlement???

[MOBNigga06]

Well, I think he has a strong case. Most of the discrepancies between real life and the movie were completely arbitrary. There was no creative need to misrepresent history - the story would have been fine if they simply represented things as they were.

Listening to B.G. Knocc Out's interviews on VladTV makes you realize that the estate of Eazy E could also sue the movie for defamation. Portraying Eazy as broke? Making it look like he got beat up? No need to do either of those things, unless you're Dr. Dre and you still secretly hate the man a little bit.

I agreed up until the Dre comment. I really believe that this is Cube's doing and that Cube is the one who still hates Heller. I've seen the hate for Heller with No Vaseline, I've never seen it coming from Dre. Also, as I said somewhere else, Cube is in the movie business, not Dre.

 I think Suge has a case as well because people keep coming out and saying that Suge never beat up Eazy. It's crazy to think that Suge kilt someone over how he was portrayed in the film.

Cube is obviously responsible for the negative portrayal of Heller.

But I suspect that Dre is behind the inaccurate representation of Eazy E in the period after NWA broke up.

Whoever is in charge of the Eazy E estate clearly didn't care much about the movie accurately portraying E's final years.

BG Knocc Out thought Dre was responsible for the misrepresentation of that period, and I think he's right about that. Dre is a snake.

[papa-smurf]

Well, I think he has a strong case. Most of the discrepancies between real life and the movie were completely arbitrary. There was no creative need to misrepresent history - the story would have been fine if they simply represented things as they were.

Listening to B.G. Knocc Out's interviews on VladTV makes you realize that the estate of Eazy E could also sue the movie for defamation. Portraying Eazy as broke? Making it look like he got beat up? No need to do either of those things, unless you're Dr. Dre and you still secretly hate the man a little bit.

I agreed up until the Dre comment. I really believe that this is Cube's doing and that Cube is the one who still hates Heller. I've seen the hate for Heller with No Vaseline, I've never seen it coming from Dre. Also, as I said somewhere else, Cube is in the movie business, not Dre.

 I think Suge has a case as well because people keep coming out and saying that Suge never beat up Eazy. It's crazy to think that Suge kilt someone over how he was portrayed in the film.

Jerry heller is the one who hates ice cube. ice cube dont care about no jerry heller.

[mrfranklin]

its a movie some parts are fabricated Jeery going ot get this case tossed out.

[GangstaBoogy]

Jerry just wants to be loved. At least he'll get to see Ice Cube in person 1 last time.