Master KG set to be sued over alleged 'Jerusalema' copyright infringement

Master KG. Picture: Instagram

Master KG. Picture: Instagram

Published Nov 17, 2021

Share

There has been continued drama around Master KGs 2019 megahit “Jerusalema” since collaborator Nomcebo Zikode claimed that she hadn't been paid the royalties due to her for her work on the song.

Now, according to entertainment commentator Phil Mphela, a fresh letter of demand over copyright ownership has allegedly been served to Master KG and his reps, by producer Charmza The DJ's lawyers.

Producer Charmza The DJ has served Master KG’s camp with a letter of demand over copyright ownership of “Jerusalema”.

Charmza The DJ claims the original melody of the composition, beats and the arrangement of the song and vocals were his.

The letter of demand alleges that, in August of 2019, Charmza The DJ was invited by Master KG to work with him and Zikode in studio, in Midrand.

It's during that studio session that Charmza's legal reps, Adams & Adams claim that he “originated, authored, composed and produced the original musical composition” that would go on to be released as Jerusalema.

The letter of demand goes on to cite the Copyright Act in their claim, that their client is entitled to obtain relief in the form of, among other things, damages.

Just this July, Zikode released a statement claiming she still hadn't been paid her royalties.

“I have not been paid a cent by the label for 'Jerusalema', despite the song's global success," she said on Instagram.

“I have been ridiculed with efforts to marginalise my contribution … I, as a female artist, can't stay silent on this anymore. The matter is now with my lawyers,” she said.

Master KG then took to Twitter to post his response: “@Nomcebozikode

“Can you confirm if you Not yet Received R1.5 Million So far From Jerusalema???

“And before I Explain many things You Guys Havent Paid Me For 'Xola Moya Wami" Till date...But you Received money so far From Jerusalema”

At the time of writing, Master KG and his reps had not responded publicly to the letter of demand.