Adequately preparing a client to take the stand is the most critical task on any trial attorney's preparation list, followed closely by identifying and preparing key evidence and making logistical arrangements well before trial. "Winging" any of these tasks may have disastrous consequences in open court. However, in the case of Jay Z's and Timbaland's Big Pimpin' trial, it resulted in some unexpected comic relief.

On October 14, 2015, Shawn "Jay Z" Carter took the stand in a trial based on copyright infringement claims arising from his 1999 hit song, Big Pimpin'. The hook for Big Pimpin' loops several flute notes sampled from Baligh Hamdi's composition Khosara Khosara for a 1957 Egyptian film. Hamdi's relative, plaintiff Osama Ahmend Fahmy, sued Jay Z, music producer Timothy "Timbaland" Mosley, EMI, Universal Music, Paramount Pictures, MTV, and others over a dispute regarding rights to the sample. Fahmy filed his suit in August 2007 in the Central District of California, and a jury trial began on October 13, 2015. After the conclusion of testimony, but before the case was submitted to the jury, the court dismissed the case on October 21, 2015, finding that Fahmy lacked standing to pursue his claim.

In the case, Fahmy claimed that the defendants did not enter into valid agreements to convey the right to use Khosara in Big Pimpin', and that they failed to obtain the consent of the author or his heirs to introduce modifications or additions. Fahmy supported his argument with Egyptian law, which allows authors and their heirs to refuse to allow a use of a composition in ways deemed objectionable. Fahmy asserted that the raunchy lyrics of Big Pimpin' violated his uncle's moral rights over the work, which are non-transferrable under Egyptian law.

The defendants claimed that the sample was properly licensed based on a deal with a foreign subsidiary of EMI that had, in turn, its own deal with Hamdi's heirs. The defendants further claim that even if Khosara had not been properly licensed, Fahmy accepted a lump-sum buyout from the Middle Eastern label that gave EMI song rights. As such, they asserted that Fahmy gave up exclusive control of all rights in Kohsara that have application in the US, and therefore lacked standing to bring his claims.

The questions arising from plaintiff's copyright infringements claims included whether:

Jay Z's testimony included a description of his career. In response to a question by his own attorney, Jay Z provided a list of ventures with which he is involved, with one glaring omission:

Jay Z's slip regarding Tidal, his streaming music service, has been met with widespread media derision. Jay Z spent $56 million to acquire Tidal in January, but the service has been plagued by numerous woes since it launched in March. Some of those bumps include a revolving door of CEOs and reports that Sony was considering pulling music from the label's artists off of the service, including music by Jay Z's own wife, Beyoncé.

Jay Z was on firmer footing for other topics, however. His testimony included an explanation of the creative process that led him and Timbaland to create Big Pimpin'. He testified he did not know that Big Pimpin' had a sample, and that others on his team handle licensing issues. He disputed Fahmy's counsel's characterization of the song as vulgar, noting instead that the song features "adult lyrics."

"I like the song," he said, noting that he still enjoys performing it. "It's pretty good."

Jay Z's testimony also included snippets that scored laughs during trial. For instance, he was asked by his own attorney about artists whose careers he has nurtured, including Rihanna, J. Cole, and Kanye West. During this line of questioning, Jay Z noted that "one or two people" may have heard of Kanye West, because, after all, "[h]e's running for president."

Jay Z likewise commented, to laughter, on his working relationship with Timbaland. According to Jay Z, he "tells me his beats are better than my raps. I tell him my raps are better than his beats. It's an ongoing thing that I keep winning."

Earlier in the trial, Timbaland attempted to construct a live beat for the jury, to support his testimony that the sample had little impact on the overall production of the recording. Timbaland's attorneys brought out a keyboard for the producer, but technical problems with the keyboard interfered. What did the jury hear instead? They were treated to Timbaland's vocal simulation of a hip-hop beat (an impromptu beatboxing concert of sorts) to demonstrate the importance in his production of the beat, and not the sample.

Before the case was sent to the jury for deliberations, it came to an abrupt end on October 21, 2015, when the court found that Fahmy lacked standing to pursue the case.

For counsel with less nimble clients than Jay Z and Timbaland, adequate preparation for both substantive and administrative tasks may prevent unnecessary stress and potential prejudice to the client, and allow counsel to present case complexities and issues without avoidable glitches. Practical Law has many resources to help counsel prepare for trial, including the Practice Note, Preparing for Trial (Federal). For a collection of additional resources designed to help counsel with all aspects of trial, see Practical Law's Trial Toolkit (Federal).