Rap superstar Eminem has found himself in an unexpected legal showdown with two reality television stars from The Real Housewives of Potomac, alleging they're 'harassing' him over a deposition in their ongoing trademark battle.
The 'Shady' Conflict Origins
The dispute began in 2023 when Real Housewives stars Gizelle Bryant, 55, and Robyn Dixon, 46, attempted to trademark the name of their popular 'Reasonably Shady' podcast. Eminem, who has built his career around the Slim Shady persona for decades, immediately opposed the filing, arguing their use of 'shady' was too similar to his established brand.
What followed has been two years of legal back-and-forth between the 53-year-old rapper, born Marshall Bruce Mathers III, and the reality television personalities. The conflict recently escalated when Bryant and Dixon filed a motion accusing the Oscar-winning artist of avoiding a court-ordered deposition.
Scheduling Nightmare and Allegations
According to legal documents obtained by Daily Mail, the Housewives claim they faced a scheduling nightmare trying to pin down Eminem for his deposition. After weeks of negotiations, they were finally offered October 29 - but with strict conditions that sparked further controversy.
Eminem's team insisted the rapper would only appear for two hours and demanded a 2 p.m. start time, with his attorney reportedly warning, 'Getting our client to commit to a deposition is very difficult and we suggest that you take the opportunity when you can get him.'
Bryant and Dixon described this as a 'take it or leave it' approach, arguing the late start would complicate matters for their legal vendors who work standard business hours. They criticised the lack of explanation for why the rapper 'could only start at 2 p.m.' and blasted his team's refusal to agree to a short discovery extension.
Eminem's Counterattack
On November 11, Eminem fired back with a strongly worded legal response. His legal team accused the Housewives of exaggerating the issue and rushing to court rather than continuing negotiations.
The rapper's response stated that Bryant and Dixon's 'refusal to cooperate and insistence in filing a motion over a 3-hour start-time difference highlights that their pursuit of Eminem's deposition is designed to harass.'
Eminem's team maintained he was willing to run the deposition 'as late as was necessary' to make the timing work and argued that scheduling court reporters outside normal hours was entirely possible.
The Creative Defence
The rapper's legal team revealed the real obstacle: his music career. Eminem 'cannot begin before early afternoon Eastern' because he's currently tied up in studio sessions working on new music.
His longtime manager Paul Rosenberg filed a detailed declaration explaining how disruptive a morning deposition would be to the creative process. Rosenberg wrote that Eminem is 'presently working on new music for various projects which requires his daily attendance,' emphasising that skipping morning studio sessions could derail an entire day's work for multiple engineers and collaborators.
Rosenberg described this as 'a very expensive loss of time and expense to Eminem and other parties,' noting that with deadlines approaching, it's 'imperative' the rapper maintains his daily studio schedule throughout November and December.
No Signs of Backing Down
While the Patent and Trademark Office hasn't yet issued a ruling, neither side appears ready to concede. Speaking at BravoCon in Las Vegas earlier this month, Dixon quipped about the ongoing battle, telling fans, 'He's still being shady. We're still going down the road with the lawsuit. And we're fighting it. We're going to win, at some point.'
This isn't Eminem's only trademark battle. Just last week, the rapper launched separate legal action against Australian beach brand Swim Shady, a Sydney-based company founded in 2023 that successfully trademarked its name in the U.S. earlier this year.
The legal documents reveal both sides remain firmly entrenched in their positions, with the 'shady' terminology proving valuable enough to both parties to justify a prolonged and expensive legal confrontation that shows no immediate signs of resolution.
