In the legal dispute with investors over Kanye West’s antisemitic remarks and other inappropriate actions during their Yeezy collaboration, Adidas has prevailed.
HipHopDX was able to examine court records that showed the judge dismissed the claim against the sports behemoth, siding with them and charging them with neglecting to protect investors by not addressing the possible harm Ye may create.
Judge Karin J. Immergut determined that the HRSA-ILA Funds’ complaint lacked sufficient evidence and did not establish Adidas’ deceitful investors about its profitable but erratic collaboration with West. The partnership ended in October 2022 as a result of a series of racist and antisemitic remarks made by the rapper.
Judge Karin J. Immergut expressed her concern, saying, “Certainly, that [Kanye] allegedly engaged in such behavior while working with Adidas is troubling.” “What [West] is said to have done is not supported by this Court.” However, the matter at hand does not concern whether or not to censure [him] or hold Adidas responsible for [his] behavior.
“This Court must decide whether [HRSA-ILA Funds] has sufficiently pleaded facts demonstrating Adidas’s misrepresentation of investors and subsequent federal securities fraud. This is a clear legal matter. The answer is no, based on the record that is currently before this court,” she said.
The case, which was filed in an Oregon court last year, accused Adidas of neglecting to “publicly disclose offensive and inappropriate activities performed between 2013 and 2018” by Kanye West, in addition to the company’s own internal concerns regarding his conduct.
The German corporation “misled investors and committed federal securities fraud,” according to investors as a result.
Later, Adidas filed a move to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming that its risk disclosures were adequate and that it was not necessary to expose Kanye’s wrongdoing to the public.
Adidas eventually used the motion to sever connections with Kanye, highlighting the fact that the company’s contracts typically contain clauses allowing it to terminate relationships over illegal or unethical conduct.
“Nothing in Adidas’s risk disclosures states, or even implies, that Ye or any other partner had never engaged in any inappropriate or problematic conduct,” the sportswear company said, refuting claims that it had misled investors.
Therefore, notwithstanding the plaintiff’s suggestion that they do not include every incident of Ye’s prior misbehavior, those disclosures are not deceptive.
Even while Kanye made a lot of his antisemitic remarks in public—on social media or during interviews, for example—a 2023 exposé by The New York Times revealed his extensive history of alleged wrongdoing while employed with Adidas.
The article asserts that Ye “made Adidas executives watch pornography during a meeting,” “advised a Jewish Adidas manager to kiss a picture of Hitler every day,” and made “angry, sexually crude comments” at staff members, among other acts. It bases these claims on interviews with both current and former employees as well as hundreds of previously unreleased internal records.
“Time and again, Adidas’ leaders, greedy for the profits, abided by his misconduct,” it added.
