Biggie, Missy, Uzi and Gunna Are in a $64 Million Fight Over Sunglasses Ads. I Read the Song List.

When Warner Music Group sued the company behind Ray-Ban and Oakley on Oct. 9, the headlines led with pop. The law firm's announcement named Miley Cyrus, Led Zeppelin, Dua Lipa, Ariana Grande, Bruno Mars, Charli xcx and Fleetwood Mac. Billboard added Taylor Swift, Drake and Rihanna. Fine. But I pulled the actual song list attached to the complaint, and hip-hop is all over it. This is an Uncut Original, and here's what's in there.

First, the case. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, names 23 Warner companies as plaintiffs, including Atlantic Music Group, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Bad Boy Records, Elektra, 300 Entertainment, TenThousand Projects Holdings and the Warner Chappell publishing companies. The defendants are Luxottica Group S.p.A., Luxottica of America, Oakley, Chapter 4 Corp., Costa Del Mar and Eye Buy Direct. The complaint calls them companies "in operation for and service of EssilorLuxottica," which it says owns more than 150 eyewear brands including Ray-Ban, Oakley, Costa Del Mar, Oliver Peoples and Sunglass Hut.

The accusation is simple. Warner alleges that Luxottica's brands made social media commercials, and also reposted influencer videos, that used Warner songs without permission or a license fee. The complaint says Luxottica "misappropriated at least 427" Warner works and "deliberately violated warnings from Instagram, TikTok, Meta, and YouTube" that copyrighted music could not be used in posts without a license. It says the brands have more than 36.14 million followers across those platforms. These are allegations. None of it has been proven in court.

The money: the complaint asks for actual damages and Luxottica's profits, or, at Warner's election, "the maximum statutory damages in the amount of $150,000 with respect to each work infringed." Billboard reported Warner is seeking up to a total of $64 million. Music Business Worldwide did the same math, 427 times $150,000, and got a theoretical ceiling of $64.05 million.

Now the list. Schedule A splits the claims into sound recordings, the masters, and musical compositions, the publishing. Both halves name the artist, the title, the copyright registration, the Warner company that claims it and the Luxottica brand accused of using it. Here's the rap and R&B that jumped out at me.

Bad Boy is in the building. The schedule lists multiple Notorious B.I.G. recordings claimed by Bad Boy Records LLC, all tied to Oakley posts, including the 2005 remaster of "Juicy." It also lists Mase's "Feel So Good" as a Bad Boy master used by Oakley, with Warner-Tamerlane Publishing listed on the composition side. A Bad Boy classic allegedly sitting under a sunglasses ad with no license is exactly the kind of thing Warner wants a judge to see.

Missy Elliott shows up on both halves. The schedule lists "Get Ur Freak On" as an Oakley use and "Pass That Dutch" as a Sunglass Hut use, on the master and publishing sides. If you're a brand looking for instant cool, Missy is the first place you'd go. That's the point Warner is making: these songs are valuable because they work.

The new generation is in there too. Lil Uzi Vert's "20 Min" and "Just Wanna Rock" are listed as Oakley uses, and another Uzi track is tied to Ray-Ban. Don Toliver's "BANDIT" and "KRYPTONITE" are listed for Oakley, and "No Pole" for Ray-Ban. Jack Harlow's "First Class" and "Lovin On Me" are both on the list for Oakley, along with a remix featuring Lil Wayne.

From the 300 side, Gunna has four sound recordings on the list, "Helluva Price," "P power" with Drake, "STREET SWEEPER" with Future and "fukumean," all tied to Oakley, with "fukumean" also tied to Ray-Ban. Young Stoner Life and Young Thug's "Came and Saw" with Rowdy Rebel is there under 300. So is Megan Thee Stallion and Dua Lipa's "Sweetest Pie." Atlantic claims YoungBoy Never Broke Again's "Right Foot Creep." And here's one for the historians: MC Shan's "The Bridge," claimed by Warner Records, is listed against Chapter 4 Corp. under the brand name Supreme. Kodak Black, Roddy Ricch and Lizzo are on the schedule, and on the publishing side Warner-Tamerlane claims compositions credited to Drake with Future and Young Thug and to Metro Boomin with Travis Scott and Young Thug.

Why does this matter for rap specifically? Because sync money is real money, and it doesn't all go to Warner. Billboard explained the rule plainly: Instagram and TikTok have blanket licenses that let regular users soundtrack their videos with pre-cleared songs, but music companies require commercial accounts to buy sync licenses, "just like for a conventional TV ad placement." When a brand skips that step, the artist and the songwriter don't get their cut of a fee that was never paid.

The complaint makes that argument itself. It says Luxottica "deprived Plaintiffs and their artists and songwriters of the ability to control how and where their art is used." Think about that for a Biggie record. His estate doesn't get to decide whether "Juicy" sells Oakleys. That's the kind of decision that should come with a phone call and a check.

This is a pattern, not a one-off. Music Business Worldwide reported that Warner sued PacSun in December 2025 over at least 290 works and Crumbl over at least 159, and that Warner and Crumbl reached an agreement in principle to settle in May. Billboard reported that labels and publishers have also sued Chili's, Marriott and DSW, and that the vast majority of these cases end in settlements. MBW also reported that DSW went on offense in 2025, suing Universal, Sony and BMG to argue its posts were covered by the labels' deals with the platforms.

Dez's read, and this is opinion: Luxottica is not going to want a jury looking at a spreadsheet of Biggie, Missy and Uzi tracks under its logos. I think this settles, like most of these do. The real question is whether any of that settlement money makes it down to the artists whose songs are on the list, or whether it stays at the label level.

What we still don't know: whether Luxottica disputes the song list or argues the platform libraries covered it; how much of any recovery Warner shares with the artists and songwriters on Schedule A; and how many of the videos are still up. EssilorLuxottica did not immediately respond to Billboard's request for comment, and MBW said it had contacted the company and Warner. Luxottica has not filed a response in the public coverage I reviewed.