ourt tosses out Mantse's body of evidence against Obrafour
Mantse Aryeequaye who is the pioneer behind Chale Wote Road celebration has had his argument against rapper Obrafour and music maker Hammar tossed out by an Accra High Court.
This comes after Mantse sued Obrafour and Hammar for asserting responsibility for well known state "Executioner Cut Blood" utilized in Obrafour's Oye Ohene tune.
GH¢10,000 was given to Obrafour and Sledge of The Last Two Music Gathering, who delivered the melody "Oye Ohene," at a court meeting on Thursday, February 15, 2024.
The court excused the case because of what it considered to be "irregularities and break of court rules" in Mantse's writ, as per the data available anywhere.
Mantse recorded a claim against Obrafour and Sledge on January 12, 2024. Mantse had guaranteed in a writ of request that Obrafour had enrolled the expression as his own in the US in September 2022, without any trace of any assent from him or move of freedoms.
He asserted that up until this point, he approved of Obrafour and Sledge, the tune's makers, utilizing his notable "Executioner Cut" line — which was taken from his verbally expressed word piece — without getting authorization.
Mantse guaranteed that following a new occurrence in which American rapper Drake utilized "Executioner Cut" in a tune, he had made different fruitless endeavors to meet with Obrafour and Sledge.
The pioneer behind the Chalewote Celebration guarantees that he documented this lawful activity subsequent to discovering that Obrafour had enlisted the melody and the expression "Executioner Cut" in the US.
"Offended party says first Litigant got notice from certain controllers of Drake, (an unfamiliar performer), mentioning the utilization of Offended parties work which they wrongly credited to first Respondent, since they heard it on his tune 'Oye Ohene'. first litigant didn't illuminate Drake's overseers that the first Respondent was not the proprietor of the work, but rather who utilized it on his tune, (similarly as Drake is to utilize it). first Litigant didn't illuminate Offended party, the genuine proprietor of the work, knowing very well that the piece of the melody being looked for by Drake is entirely the protected innovation of the Offended party," some portion of the writ read.