Bad Bunny Lawsuit: $16M Voice Case, La Casita, Dembow Copyright

Bad Bunny lawsuits currently in play include a $16 million voice-recording suit filed in Puerto Rico in January 2026, a homeowner’s complaint over a Humacao house replicated for his 2025 residency, and a sprawling copyright case over the dembow rhythm that names him alongside more than 150 other artists. Earlier suits over the song “Safaera” and the track “Enséñame a Bailar” have been resolved by settlement and dismissal, respectively, and a 2023 claim from a former girlfriend has an unclear public status. Here is what each case involves and where it stands.

The $16 Million Voice-Recording Suit in Puerto Rico

On January 5, 2026, Tainaly Y. Serrano Rivera filed a 32-page complaint in Puerto Rico’s Court of First Instance in San Juan against Bad Bunny, his producer Roberto J. Rosado (known as La Paciencia), and Rimas Entertainment. She seeks at least $16 million.{¹} The suit targets two tracks: “Solo de Mí” from the 2018 album X 100pre, and “EoO” from the 2025 album Debí Tirar Más Fotos.{²}

Serrano Rivera says she and Rosado were classmates in the theater program at the Interamerican University of Arecibo in 2018, when Rosado asked her to record the phrase “Mira, puñeta, no me quiten el perreo” and she sent it as a WhatsApp voice note.{³} She says she was never told it would be used commercially, never signed any contract or license, and was never paid.{⁴}

The complaint invokes Puerto Rico’s Right of Publicity Act (Act No. 139-2011), which bars unauthorized commercial use of a person’s voice or other identifying attributes, and the Moral Rights of Authors Act (Act No. 55-2012), which protects rights to attribution and integrity.{³} It adds claims for general tort liability and unjust enrichment under the civil code.{⁵} Beyond the two album tracks, the suit alleges the recording was played during 31 concerts in Bad Bunny’s 2025 San Juan residency and used in promotional materials and merchandise.{⁶}

The case (No. SJ2026CV00019) is before Judge Aileen M. Navas Auger. Defense attorneys for Bad Bunny and Rimas entered appearances in late April 2026, and Bad Bunny’s response deadline was set for June 8, 2026. Co-defendant Rosado could not be located, and the court ordered service by publication in El Nuevo Día.{⁷} Neither Bad Bunny nor Rimas Entertainment has publicly commented on the allegations.

A Recent Puerto Rico Ruling That May Cut Against the Defense

In early 2026, the Puerto Rico Supreme Court held in Friger Salgueiro v. Mech-Tech College that the commercial right of publicity under Act No. 139-2011 can only be transferred by written agreement, that verbal consent or an employment relationship is not enough, and that a single unauthorized use after revocation is enough to trigger liability.{⁸} If Serrano Rivera’s factual account holds and no written authorization exists, that ruling strengthens her claim.

The “La Casita” Homeowner Lawsuit

In September 2025, 84-year-old Román Carrasco Delgado sued Bad Bunny, Rimas Entertainment, Move Concerts PR, and A1 Productions in the Court of First Instance in San Juan, seeking at least $1 million, with some reports citing figures up to $6 million.{⁹}{¹⁰}

Carrasco, a widower from Humacao, says he and his family built the salmon-colored house with the yellow trim and wraparound porch by hand in the 1960s. He alleges that scouts asked to use the home for a short film and he agreed, but that he was never told the house’s likeness would become a centerpiece of Bad Bunny’s brand.{¹¹} The complaint alleges an exact replica was built as a stage set for the “No Me Quiero Ir de Aquí” residency at the Coliseo de Puerto Rico, and that the home’s image appeared in social media and merchandise without his authorization.{⁹}

Carrasco cannot read or write. The complaint alleges that when scouts presented documents on a phone screen for his signature, those signatures were “fraudulently” applied to two contracts he never saw or had explained to him.{¹¹} He reportedly received two checks totaling $5,200 for the video shoot. The property, the suit says, has since become a tourist stop with visitors arriving daily to take photos, costing him his privacy and causing emotional distress.{¹⁰}

The Ex-Girlfriend’s Earlier $40 Million Voice Claim

The Serrano Rivera suit is not the first voice-use complaint against Bad Bunny. In 2023, his former girlfriend Carliz de la Cruz Hernández sued in Puerto Rico, alleging he used a 2015 recording she made of the spoken tag “Bad Bunny, baby” without her consent after their 2016 breakup.{¹²}

She pointed to the 2022 track “Dos Mil 16” and said a representative offered her $2,000 to authorize the tag on that song and retroactively on another track, “Pa Ti,” but she refused and did not sign. She sought upward of $40 million across privacy, publicity, and tort categories. The case was removed to federal court and later sent back to Puerto Rico’s court system.{¹²} Its current status is not confirmed in available reporting.

The “Safaera” Copyright Suit (Settled)

In September 2021, AOM Music Inc., doing business as BM Records, filed a copyright suit in federal court in California, alleging “Safaera” contained unauthorized samples from three DJ Playero tracks: “Besa Tu Cuerpo,” “Chocha Con Bicho,” and “Sigan Bailando.” AOM sought $150,000 per work in statutory damages, or actual damages plus profits, and an injunction.{¹³}

Bad Bunny and Rimas denied infringement and raised 21 affirmative defenses. They admitted that “Safaera” contained samples and interpolations and that they held no license from the plaintiff, but denied the samples came from AOM’s catalog.{¹⁴} After mediation in January 2023, the parties reached a “settlement in principle,” and the judge suspended hearings to allow finalization.{¹⁵} Final terms have not been publicly disclosed.

The “Enséñame a Bailar” Case (Dismissed)

In May 2025, Nigerian producer Dera (Ezeani Chidera Godfrey) and his label emPawa Africa sued in federal court in California, alleging that “Enséñame a Bailar” from Un Verano Sin Ti used an uncleared sample from the 2019 track “Empty My Pocket” by Joeboy. Bad Bunny’s team said the sample had been cleared through Lakizo Entertainment.{¹⁶}

In January 2026, the plaintiffs’ attorneys withdrew, citing “irreparable differences” over strategy.{¹⁷} emPawa did not find new counsel and was struck from the suit. Dera missed a February 5, 2026 discovery hearing and a March 6 filing deadline. On March 9, 2026, U.S. District Judge Otis Wright dismissed the case with prejudice, finding the plaintiffs had abandoned it.{¹⁸} Bad Bunny then sought $465,612 in legal fees from emPawa, arguing the suit was meritless.{¹⁶} Even so, Dera and Joeboy are now listed as co-writers of “Enséñame a Bailar” in the song’s credits.{¹⁹}

The Dembow Rhythm Copyright Case

Bad Bunny is one of more than 150 artists named in a copyright case brought by Cleveland “Clevie” Browne and the heirs of Wycliffe “Steely” Johnson, the Jamaican duo Steely & Clevie. They allege that their 1989 song “Fish Market” is the origin of the dembow rhythm underpinning reggaeton, and that more than 1,800 songs copied it without credit or compensation. Damages sought potentially run into hundreds of millions of dollars.{²⁰}

Other defendants include Daddy Yankee, Karol G, Pitbull, Drake, Luis Fonsi, and units of all three major record companies.{²¹} The defense argues a drum rhythm lacks the originality required for copyright protection. The case is before U.S. District Judge Andre Birotte Jr. in Los Angeles. The defense has moved for summary judgment, with a ruling expected in the coming months.{²⁰}

1
Rolling Stone. Bad Bunny Lawsuit Songs Debí Tirar Más Fotos X 100pre
2
Billboard. Bad Bunny Lawsuit Debí Tirar Más Fotos X 100pre Songs
3
Music Business Worldwide. Bad Bunny Faces $16M Lawsuit Over Alleged Unauthorized Voice Recording Used in Two Songs
4
Rolling Stone Canada. Bad Bunny Sued for $16 Million Over Voice Recordings on Debí Tirar Más Fotos and X 100pre Songs
5
Digital Music News. Bad Bunny Lawsuit Unlicensed Vocal Samples
6
Pitchfork. Bad Bunny Sued Over Unauthorized Voice Recording
7
Celebrity Dockets. Bad Bunny Lawsuits
8
Puerto Rico Supreme Court via Jackson Lewis. PR Supreme Court Written Consent Needed Use Images Employees Contractors Commercially
9
People. Bad Bunny Reportedly Sued for $1 Million by Puerto Rican Homeowner
10
We Are Mitú. Bad Bunny La Casita Lawsuit
11
Newsday. Puerto Rico Bad Bunny Home La Casita
12
Vice. Bad Bunny Ex Girlfriend Lawsuit
13
Pitchfork. Bad Bunny Reaches Preliminary Settlement in Safaera Copyright Infringement Lawsuit
14
Micro Juris. AOM Music Inc v. Benito Antonio Martinez Ocasio, Answer to Complaint
15
Rolling Stone. Bad Bunny Reaches Preliminary Settlement Over Reggaeton Hit Safaera
16
Hola. Bad Bunny Legal Victory Inside the Copyright Case Over Enséñame a Bailar
17
Billboard. Bad Bunny Wins Lawsuit Uncleared Sample Un Verano Sin Ti
18
Rolling Stone Australia. Bad Bunny Wins Copyright Case Enséñame a Bailar
19
Digital Music News. Bad Bunny Lawsuit Dismissal
20
Billboard. Bad Bunny Reggaeton Lawsuit Dem Bow Rhythm
21
Rolling Stone. Bad Bunny Dembow Reggaeton Dancehall Copyright Lawsuit