Ye has reached a settlement in a copyright lawsuit tied to Vultures 1, resolving claims that he used an uncleared sample despite failed licensing negotiations.
The case was brought by Memphis artists Criminal Manne, DJ Squeeky, and the estate of Kilo G, who alleged that Ye’s track “Fuk Sumn” incorporated elements of their 1994 record “Drink a Yak (Part 2)” without authorization. According to the lawsuit, portions of the original recording were directly recognizable in the song, with specific lyrics and vocal elements appearing early in the track.
What made the case more complicated is that this was not a situation where the sample was used without any attempt to clear it. The plaintiffs claimed that Ye’s team had initiated conversations to license the material, but that those negotiations ultimately broke down. Despite that, the song remained in circulation, which became a central part of the legal argument. From their perspective, the issue was not just unauthorized use, but continued use after a deal failed to materialize.
Court filings submitted this week indicate that both sides have now agreed in principle to settle the dispute, though the terms have not been disclosed. It remains unclear whether the resolution involves financial compensation, changes to the recording, or both. Without those details, the outcome addresses the legal exposure but leaves open questions about how the track will be handled moving forward.
The case follows a pattern that has surfaced repeatedly throughout Ye’s career. He has faced numerous lawsuits tied to sampling and interpolation, particularly in situations where recognizable elements of older recordings are incorporated into new releases without finalized agreements in place. One of the more visible examples involved the estate of Donna Summer, which was resolved in 2024 after similar claims of unauthorized use.
The timeline behind the “Fuk Sumn” dispute reflects how breakdowns in process can escalate into legal action. The plaintiffs alleged that licensing discussions continued for months before collapsing, at which point they were informed that Ye no longer had legal representation following a broader shakeup of his team. Subsequent attempts to resume negotiations reportedly stalled again, with no agreement ever being finalized.
Ty Dolla $ign was originally named in the lawsuit as a co-defendant but reached a separate settlement in 2025, exiting the case before this latest resolution.
Situations like this continue to highlight a recurring tension in music production. Sampling remains one of the most powerful creative tools available to artists, but it operates within a framework that requires clearance, agreement, and coordination across multiple parties. When that process is incomplete or disrupted, the legal risk does not disappear, even if the music is already released and circulating.
The settlement brings this particular case to a close, but the underlying dynamic remains unchanged.
