50 Cent Sues Ex Shaniqua Tompkins Over Shocking Online Tell-All Content

In July 2025, a viral YouTube trailer for Other Side of the Coin reignited a decades-old saga, thrusting Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson and his ex, Shaniqua Tompkins, into a heated federal lawsuit. G-Unit Books, 50 Cent’s publishing imprint, accuses Tompkins of breaking a 2007 contract that gave them exclusive control over her life story. The stakes? A cool $1 million in damages, a court order to silence her online revelations, and a clash over who gets to tell the truth in the digital age. This isn’t just a legal spat it’s a raw, emotional battle over personal history, trauma, and power.

Dating back to 2007, 50 Cent’s first son Marquise’s mother, Tompkins, signed an agreed life rights contract through G-Unit Books for $80,000, plus future earnings. In plain terms, G-Unit owned her story her face, name, and life experiences, most of which concerned her relationship with 50 Cent for good. The deal was “irrevocable, exclusive, and perpetual,” barring her from sharing or profiting off her personal history without their approval. Why do celebrities like 50 Cent secure these contracts? To control their narrative, protect their brand, and sometimes, as attorney Reena Jain noted, to prevent others from

“monetizing their history and his name.”

In today’s world of YouTube and TikTok, though, enforcing such limits is like trying to hold water in your hands.

G-Unit claims Tompkins crossed the line with her 2023 web series Other Side of the Coin, where she boldly stated she

“helped to build the G-Unit legacy”

and that

“Curtis ‘50 Cent’ Jackson wouldn’t be who he is today without her.”

More recently, her Instagram posts, including one tied to the high-profile Diddy trial, stirred the pot further. In it, she quipped,

“Fun fact: I ain’t never sell no ?,”

seemingly challenging the contract’s validity.

Beyond contracts, this case cuts deep. Tompkins has accused 50 Cent of physically assaulting her during her 1996 pregnancy and throughout their relationship, claims she aired in Unspoken: Story Time clips and social media. These allegations, verified by consistent reporting across Yahoo, WBLS, and HotNewHipHop, add a gut-wrenching layer. Can a contract silence someone’s trauma? G-Unit’s attorney, Reena Jain, insists Tompkins’ actions were “intentional,” damaging the “core value” of the deal’s exclusivity. Yet, for Tompkins, speaking out may be about reclaiming her voice after years of silence.

This lawsuit mirrors a broader trend: celebrities battling to control their stories as social media empowers anyone to go viral. Think Surviving R. Kelly, where survivors’ voices sparked legal fights, or Britney Spears’ memoir, navigating her conservatorship’s shadow. The digital era has flipped the script life rights deals, once ironclad, now face the chaos of YouTube and Instagram. As Jain put it, Tompkins’ posts were a

“strategic move to reignite interest”

in her story, leveraging platforms that didn’t exist in 2007.

Until mid-July 2025, Tompkins has not publicly responded to the lawsuit. G-Unit is requesting an injunction for the erasure of her content, an eternal gag, and no less than $1 million in damages, along with costs. The case, filed in federal court, could see preliminary hearings soon to address content takedowns. Legal experts may debate whether perpetual contracts hold up against modern free speech principles, especially when abuse allegations are involved.