Cher has been exempted from covering the substantial legal expenses, exceeding one million dollars, that Mary Bono, the widow of Sonny Bono, accumulated during their legal conflict over music royalties. Despite Cher's ultimate triumph in the dispute, a federal judicial decision stipulated that the nature of the disagreement, rooted predominantly in contractual obligations rather than federal copyright statutes, rendered the reimbursement of legal fees inapplicable in this particular context.
The protracted legal dispute, spanning four years, concluded in December 2025 with a federal judge ruling in Cher's favor. This decision reaffirmed Cher's entitlement to a 50 percent share of Sonny Bono's composition royalties, as initially outlined in their 1978 divorce settlement. Mary Bono had sought to leverage federal copyright law to reclaim these royalties, an attempt that was ultimately denied by the court.
Furthermore, the court upheld Cher's right to receive her composition and record royalties directly, even after she had transferred these rights to Irving Azoff’s Iconic Artists Group in 2022. Mary Bono had expressed a desire to manage these transactions directly with Iconic, bypassing Cher, a proposal that the court rejected.
Following these rulings, Mary Bono launched an appeal against the judge's determination that Cher was entitled to half of the publishing royalties from iconic 1960s tracks like 'I Got You Babe' and 'The Beat Goes On'. The federal appeals court is currently reviewing this challenge.
Representatives for Mary Bono declined to comment on the ongoing legal proceedings, while Cher's legal team did not immediately respond to inquiries regarding the case.
This judicial outcome highlights the intricate legal landscape surrounding intellectual property and contractual agreements in the entertainment industry. The distinction between contract law and federal copyright law proved pivotal in the court's decision regarding legal fee compensation, underscoring the complexities inherent in such high-profile disputes. The ongoing appeal suggests that the final chapter of this legal battle has yet to be written.