[Guest post] Growing storm warnings and confused collaboration timelines, Missy Elliott settles SISTA-related drama with Terry Williams
The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following post by Katfriend Georgia Jenkins (University of Liverpool), on the recent joint authorship dispute between Missy Elliot and Terry Williams and its ‘happy ending’ through a settlement agreement. Here’s what Georgia writes:
Growing storm warnings and confused collaboration timelines, Missy Elliott settles SISTA-related drama with Terry Williams
by Georgia Jenkins
![]() |
| Missy Elliott (the artist) |
While this Katfriend hoped that some 90s fads (namely, the mullet) were also shelved, the SISTA songs’ rerelease provides a timely lens to reconsider co-authorship claims against new technological forms of music distribution. In 2018, Terry Williams, an early collaborator of Elliot and producer, commenced proceedings against Elliot, inter alia, for a declaratory judgment of copyright co-ownership. Williams argued that both the SISTA album and a musical collaboration with Aaliyah, the iconic ‘Heartbroken’, were derivative works of unpublished songs co-created by himself and Elliott. According to Williams, the lack of royalties and accreditation amounted to Elliott repudiating his co-author status.
Elliott responded that the long gap between the publication of the derivative works and the complaint exhausted Williams’ co-ownership claim as it would be barred by the three-year statute of limitations. To overcome this restriction, Williams must demonstrate that he exercised due diligence and was unaware of Elliott’s repudiatory activity. Williams argued that he became aware of Heartbroken and the SISTA songs in 2017 because he withdrew himself from the music industry in 1996, only following the musical career of Prince. This argument was unsuccessful in relation to ‘Heartbroken’, given its global publication and widespread success. The District Court quoted Goldberg to reiterate the superficiality of the claim:
It is unreasonable for a ‘successful song writer and producer’ … to commence a Yoga path only to reemerge from electronic isolation twenty years later and thereafter commence suit for copyright infringement.
This proved more difficult in relation to the SISTA songs given their successful 2017 rerelease, despite Elliott arguing that copyright registration is a sufficient storm warning. As both Williams and Elliott moved for summary judgement, much of this opinion subsequently hinges on whether confusion over their creative collaboration timeline requires a trial because a genuine issue of material fact arises. Williams argued that he worked with Elliott between 1993 and 1996, contributing a combination of lyrics, harmonies, music and melodies to the unpublished songs. Elliott strictly maintained that she met him after the production of ‘4 All Da Sistas in the World’ but later testified that she worked with him a year before the album was released in 1993.
This being the US, it is of course a trial by jury. However, minutes before the thirty-eight possible jurors filed into the court room, during a side bar with the judge, Williams and Elliott settled. Later Elliott’s lawyer commented to Billboard that, “No money was paid in connection with any of Terry William’s claims, the last remnants of which were dismissed”. Further, that:
[A] small sum was paid to purchase beats created by Williams that were used in songs otherwise created and owned by Elliott. Focus was directed by her lawyer to Billboard to “Missy’s writings in her notebooks [that] were returned back to her […] along with all her music that he had in storage."
![]() |
| Missy Elliott (the Kat) |
Comment
More generally, re-releases of older music via streaming platforms have become more prevalent, whether shelved material or new remastered recordings. It forms part of a broader context where streaming dominates music distribution and large catalogues with 'proven hits with a steady listenership are most valuable'. The 2017 rerelease of SISTA songs builds upon Elliott’s powerhouse catalogue which, alongside datafication of user behaviour, increasing its value. Indeed, the only reasons Williams initially contacted Elliott’s lawyers was to sell his rights to the unpublished songs.
Against all odds, particularly as Williams eventually represented himself when his attorney withdrew, Williams struck a deal that, to his mind, reflected the value of this contribution set against the value of Elliott’s catalogue.
Flip it or reverse it, it turns out solo working it (out in court) is worth it, even against hip hop icon Missy Elliott.
[Guest post] Growing storm warnings and confused collaboration timelines, Missy Elliott settles SISTA-related drama with Terry Williams
Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati
on
Tuesday, September 16, 2025
Rating:
Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati
on
Tuesday, September 16, 2025
Rating:




No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html