Summary
- Pop icon Cher has secured a major legal victory against her late ex-husband’s widow over music royalties, but the win has arrived alongside an expensive setback that leaves the singer absorbing over $1 million in legal fees.
- ​The long-running dispute stems from a multi-year courtroom battle between Cher and Mary Bono, the widow of her former musical partner and ex-husband, Sonny Bono.
- Following their 1978 divorce, Cher was granted a permanent 50 percent stake in the composition and recording royalties generated by the iconic duo’s music catalog, including timeless classics like “I Got You Babe” and “The Beat Goes On.” ​However, tension flared in 2016 when Mary Bono attempted to invoke termination provisions under federal copyright law, which allow original creators and their surviving heirs to reclaim copyright grants after a specified window of time.
Pop icon Cher has secured a major legal victory against her late ex-husband’s widow over music royalties, but the win has arrived alongside an expensive setback that leaves the singer absorbing over $1 million in legal fees.
​The long-running dispute stems from a multi-year courtroom battle between Cher and Mary Bono, the widow of her former musical partner and ex-husband, Sonny Bono. Following their 1978 divorce, Cher was granted a permanent 50 percent stake in the composition and recording royalties generated by the iconic duo’s music catalog, including timeless classics like “I Got You Babe” and “The Beat Goes On.”
​However, tension flared in 2016 when Mary Bono attempted to invoke termination provisions under federal copyright law, which allow original creators and their surviving heirs to reclaim copyright grants after a specified window of time. Relying on this provision, royalty payments to Cher were eventually halted in 2021, prompting the singer to file a lawsuit in federal court to enforce her long-standing rights.
​In late 2025, U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt ruled decisively in Cher’s favor, affirming that her right to receive a share of the song royalties was a binding contractual obligation established during her 1978 divorce settlement rather than a copyright grant subject to termination. As part of that decision, Cher was awarded over $418,000 in withheld composition royalties, confirming her ongoing entitlement to collect her share directly.
​Following that victory, Cher’s legal team filed a motion seeking to recoup $1,023,605 in attorney fees from Mary Bono, arguing that the widow had unnecessarily prolonged the litigation by introducing frivolous defenses. However, in a newly issued ruling, Judge Kronstadt denied Cher’s request for legal fee reimbursement.
​The judge clarified that because the lawsuit turned on interpreting California state contract law rather than federal copyright law, the automatic fee-shifting provisions typical of federal copyright cases did not apply. Consequently, Cher remains responsible for covering the substantial $1 million legal bill accumulated over four years of intense courtroom maneuvering.
​Despite the heavy financial cost of the litigation, the core ruling protects Cher’s long-term rights to the lucrative Sonny & Cher music catalog, ensuring her financial interests remain fully intact moving forward.
