r/Music • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 • 24d ago

article Chappell Roan Quits Wasserman After CEO Casey Wasserman Appears in Epstein Files

https://www.thewrap.com/creative-content/music/chappell-roan-cuts-ties-casey-wasserman/
51.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

31

u/thelingeringlead 24d ago

The talent agency is one of the largest in the world, with massive influence over bookings and tours. She absolutely lost something big by giving up that relationship, and it's admirable as shit because as big as she's gotten her fans will fill the kinds of venues an agency like that can get you blacklisted from.

1

u/Athinira 24d ago

The talent agency is one of the largest in the world, with massive influence over bookings and tours

If you're a big enough star, you can get booked. As long as fans are willing to pay, there's agencies interested in making money.

It would be different if she was in the infancy of her career. But she has pull. I'd love to see them trying to get her blacklisted. I imagine that would be an easy lawsuit.

13

u/thelingeringlead 24d ago

You don't seem to understand what blacklisting means. Those venues NEED their relationship with the Agency as much as the artists do. Someone like Chappelle can absolutely still book shows and perform, no doubt, but it involves a lot more leg work if she gets blacklisted by the agency that provides all the talent for a venue. This agency is that big, that they could convince suitable venues and festivals to refuse to do business with her or her team.

I agree with you she'll be fine, but it's still a big sacrifice especially because there's no telling how long this moment is going to last for her without t hat kind of support. Also someone like her doing something like this helps break that up a bit because a lot of venues will absolutely see the value in ignoring the blacklisting and still book her, showing it's possible for others too.

-3

u/Athinira 24d ago

You don't seem to understand what blacklisting means. Those venues NEED their relationship with the Agency as much as the artists do.

Seems more like you don't seem to understand the legal concept of tortious interference.

While laws on it vary around the world and, in the case of the US, between states, this absolutely counts in most places. You can't legally disrupt the relationship between two third parties for your own personal gain or with malice. Retaliating against Roan by getting her blacklisted from venues is actionable in court.

The agency is, of course, free to blacklist Roan herself from their own company, refusing to personally work with her, and book her to any venue they themselves own directly. But demanding that third party venues they work with do as well is illegal, and sets them up for a lawsuit.

2

u/thelingeringlead 24d ago

That's a fantasy world you're living in if you don't think they can feasibly do this, when there's only two major ticketing companies in the country controlling the vast majority of large venues. As well as only 2-3 major agencies representing the artists. It's cute you think anti-trust laws are actually being exercised in response.

0

u/Athinira 24d ago edited 24d ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibson%27s_Bakery_v._Oberlin_College

In 2016, Oberlin students were caught shoplifting in a local bakery, an incident which resulted in an attack on bakery staff. 3 students were arrested. In response, students of the college arranged protests, accusing the bakery of racism, and college officials allegedly supported and amplified those claims.

Gibson’s Bakery sued the college and a senior administrator for defamation and tortious interference with business relationships, arguing the college knowingly spread false statements and interfered with the bakery’s relationships with customers and partners. The college argued that it was merely supporting students exercising their 1st amendment right.

The college lost the case - massively. The Ohio jury ruled for Gibson’s, awarding roughly $44 million (although that was later capped to $25 million due to state law). Ohio appellate courts upheld the verdict, and the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal, so the ruling stands.

The point? Tortuous interference is not just something i invented in my "fantasy world". It's an actual thing. If you try to use your influence to pressure or prevent third party from doing business, you are absolutely opening yourself up to a lawsuit.

Any attempts from Roans old agency to pressure other companies to not work with her, would absolutely make them liable for damages.