Tangent: Indemnity? Only If Martin Shkreli Was Exercising His Rights "As Intended" Under The Purchase Agreement. He Wasn't.

So. . . Martin Shkreli has (through counsel) filed more papers in Brooklyn -- this time claiming to properly make the Wu- parties part of the PleasrDAO action. [I won't link them, as they badly misstate the law and facts of the case.] Even if these papers do that, his claim is now for indemnity (from the Wu-) for disputes about the "ownership" of the work.

That theory would be heard solely and exclusively at a "Mad Hatter's Tea Party". When Martin failed to pay the over $8 million he owed in criminal fines and forfeitures (as a result of three felony convictions), from his cash -- the able USDC Judge ordered his assets seized, and sold -- by operation of law. Not by contract -- by law. "All right, title and interest" in and to the Wu-. That is what was sold. And then resold, to PleasrDAO. There was nothing wrongful about the following of the court's order.

Martin could have avoided all this, had he come up with the $8 million he then owed. But he chose (again!) to stiff a judgment creditor -- this time, the federal government. Bad idea.

So he clearly lost every right he could ever have claimed in and to the Wu- work: box, IP, recorded voices -- and all. There is no reversionary interest left for him. And it is a complete fiction to claim otherwise. Federal judgments cut off contract claims. And his is a contract claim for indemnity (and the supposed 50% reversion). Silly stuff, Marty.

In any event, here is Bloomberg Law ($$ subs. req.) on it all:

. . .Convicted hedge fund manager Martin Shkreli said two Wu-Tang Clan rappers are contractually committed to fund his defense -- and any judgment against him -- in a trade secrets case over the group’s one-of-a-kind album.

Robert “RZA” Diggs and Tarik “Cilvaringz” Azzourgarh must indemnify Shkreli in any case arising from his ownership of “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin” under a 2015 purchase agreement, he told the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York in a third-party complaint filed Tuesday.

Shkreli previously failed to add the rappers as necessary plaintiffs and as counterclaim defendants in the suit initiated by investor group PleasrDAO. . . .

This will be. . . tossed. [Do also recall that, after PleasrDAO bought it, Martin was playing his "bootleg" (wrongfully copied and retained) versions, over Discord and on YouTube live streams -- for all to hear. He even admitted on the live-streams that he knew that course of action violated the contract -- the same one he now speciously tries to claim "indemnity" under. Yikes.] Onward.

नमस्ते