Cardi B Sued by Producer Duo Who Claim She Used Their Song in ‘Enough (Miami)’ Without Permission

Cardi B (born Belcalis Almanzar) has been sued for copyright infringement by Joshua Fraustro and Miguel Aguilar, who make up producer duo Kemika1956, alleging that the Grammy-winning rapper used their “Greasy Frybread” track without permission in her hit single “Enough (Miami).”

According to court documents filed in Texas federal court on Wednesday (July 3), Fraustro and Aguilar released “Greasy Frybread” featuring Punkin’ Lusty on Nov. 9, 2021, via Tattoo Musik Group Studios. The complaint adds that the track later gained recognition on streaming services and was used in the FX series Reservation Dogs.

In addition to Cardi B, “Enough (Miami)” producers OG Parker (Joshia Parker) and DJ SwanQo (James Steed) are named as defendants in the lawsuit, along with Celebrity Booking Agency, Cardi B’s label Atlantic Records and its parent company, Warner Music Group.

“Enough (Miami)” was released on March 15, 2024, through Atlantic Records. The single peaked at No. 9 on the Billboard Hot 100 and currently boasts more than 46 million streams on Spotify alone.

The plaintiffs are requesting statutory damages; a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to prevent further infringement, followed by a permanent injunction; a court order requiring the defendants to recall and destroy all infringing copies of the work; and declaratory relief establishing the plaintiffs’ alleged ownership of the copyrighted material in question.

Cardi B, Warner Music Group/Atlantic Records, OG Parker, DJ SwanQo and Celebrity Booking Agency did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s requests for comment.

Cardi B is no stranger to copyright litigation. In August, the Bronx native and her “WAP” collaborator Megan Thee Stallion took a legal victory when they won a copyright lawsuit that had been filed against them over the track. In that case, a Manhattan federal judge tossed the lawsuit after ruling that the lyrics Cardi and Meg were accused of copying — “p—- so wet” and “n—– wild’n” — weren’t original enough to be covered by copyright law.