Latin star Ricardo Montaner is suing Universal Music Group (UMG) over the ownership of his early album masters.
Montaner has brought lawsuits in both the U.S. and Venezuela, alleging UMG is refusing to revert the rights to his first five releases between 1986 and 1992: Ricardo Montaner, Ricardo Montaner 2, Un Toque de Misterio, En El Último Lugar del Mundo and Los Hijos del Sol. These albums include the Billboard Hot Latin Songs chart-toppers “La Cima Del Cielo, “Castillo Azul” and “Piel Adentro.”
Related
Ricardo Montaner Re-Records His First 6 Albums: ‘I Need My Legacy to Pass Into the Hands of My Children’
Naoshi Fujikura of Universal Music Japan on Japan's Unique Superfan Culture & Global Ambitions: Billboard Global Power Players Interview
Katsumi Kuroiwa of Avex on the Bruno Mars Publishing Deal & Taking the Company Worldwide: Billboard Global Power Players Interview
According to the U.S. lawsuit, filed on Sunday (June 29) and obtained by Billboard, Montaner recorded these albums under a deal with Venezuelan label Love Records. The label’s parent, Rodven Records, was later sold to PolyGram, which was then acquired by UMG.
Montaner alleges that UMG has not paid him “any royalties whatsoever” since taking control of his masters in 2001. The singer served a legal notice on the company in 2022 exercising his termination right — a provision of copyright law that allows authors to claw back intellectual property decades after signing it away.
Believing he owned his first five albums effective as of 2024, Montaner entered into an indie distribution deal with ADA Latin in 2025. But UMG is maintaining that Montaner’s termination notice was invalid, and it sent a notice to ADA this past April claiming it is still the owner of Montaner’s masters and demanding that the Warner Music Group (WMG) subsidiary cease all distribution.
Now, the singer is asking the courts to “declare that Montaner is the rightful owner of the albums and to enjoin defendants from interfering with plaintiffs’ right to exploit the albums in any way they choose.” He also wants financial damages from UMG.
Related
Salt-N-Pepa Music Ownership Appeal: Rappers Say UMG Unfairly Keeping ‘Lion’s Share’ of Royalties
“Although the full scope of harm caused by defendants’ wrongful claims of ownership over the albums is beyond calculation, the amount of calculable monetary damages to Plaintiffs as of the time of this filing is in excess of $1 million and continuing to accrue,” reads the U.S. lawsuit.
A rep for Montaner declined to comment beyond the legal filings on Tuesday (June 30). Back in 2024, the Argentine-Venezuelan musician spoke to Billboard about plans to re-record his early albums due in part to the fact that “contracts at that time were predatory and totally disadvantageous for the artist.”
“I didn’t earn a single penny for my music at the beginning of my career, and at the time when I was most successful, today I am looking to record independently so that my children will have, at least from now on, the peace of mind that the music of their father — especially the most important, the most emblematic or iconic music of his career — will pass into their hands,” Montaner said at the time. “I am also complaining to the people who have the original masters, the first masters of my career, considering they have been recorded already 40 years ago. I am asking that they return them to me.”
Reps for UMG and WMG did not immediately return requests for comment on Tuesday. WMG is not involved in the lawsuit nor accused of any wrongdoing.
Termination rights are a big topic on UMG’s legal docket these days. The company is currently litigating a closely watched dispute over the issue with Salt-N-Pepa, who filed a lawsuit last year seeking to claw back their masters from the late ’80s and early ’90s. UMG said the rappers have no termination rights because they did not actually sign their original record deal. A judge agreed in January and threw out the lawsuit, teeing up an appeal that remains ongoing.
Meanwhile, UMG recently joined forces with the other major record labels to challenge a novel court ruling that said termination rights can extend overseas. They petitioned the Supreme Court to take up the case earlier this month, writing that the “headscratching” and “startling” ruling would be “every bit as disruptive as it sounds” if adopted.