scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
gregpolard wrote:I know it's been talked about a lot but it really is a shame they can't just put differences aside and do a real full fledged Black Flag show or something.
xxxMidgexxx wrote:Still don't understand what Henry has to do with this.
aquaman wrote:This is going to be very interesting/entertaining. I don't believe it's the case but I can almost see it as they baited Ginn to sue so they can counter sue for unpaid royalties, he is not going to want to produce his books.
pedro wrote:While I was reading the complaint, I was waiting for "and by the way, Stephen bought one of those clear guitars too!"
pedro wrote:While I was reading the complaint, I was waiting for "and by the way, Stephen bought one of those clear guitars too!"
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
the mean wrote:http://www.hollywoodreporter.com//sites/default/files/custom/Documents/ESQ/SSTRecordsvRollins.pdf
xxxHunterxxx wrote:A cynic might say that Ginn reformed Black Flag and launched a tour that coincided with Flag's live performances to strengthen his future trademark infringement suit against them
aquaman wrote:This is going to be very interesting/entertaining. I don't believe it's the case but I can almost see it as they baited Ginn to sue so they can counter sue for unpaid royalties, he is not going to want to produce his books.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:If Ginn really hasn't paid anybody royalties in years (and I have no idea whether that is the case), he needs to tread very carefully. Suing Flag would force them to retain counsel. That counsel would likely counterclaim against Greg/SST for unpaid royalties and various other unspeakable acts committed over the years. That would probably open the floodgates and everybody from Lawndale to the Estate of Zoogz Rift would be trying to get in on the action.
version sound wrote:Ginn has continuously been performing under the name? Sure...oh yeah, except for 1986-2013.
xxxMidgexxx wrote:Anyone here have any thoughts on this Black Flag reunion of sorts?
Now there's 2 of them.
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:One thing that will be really interesting is to see how much money they're fighting over both in terms of back royalties (provided the defendants countersue) and tour earnings.
yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
yeah, but it also mentions Rollins and the 2003 tribute record and the tour he did, as earning money under Ginn's property.
version sound wrote:You'd think that these guys would have had enough of legal battles to last a lifetime after the Unicorn suit broke them up in the '80s AND THEY NEVER RECORDED ANOTHER RECORD after the TV Party EP. On the bright side, that did leave them with a nearly perfect track record. Who knows what would have happened, had they stuck around another 3 or 4 years.
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
yeah, but it also mentions Rollins and the 2003 tribute record and the tour he did, as earning money under Ginn's property.
He HAD to sue Henry. If Henry's trademark of the Black Flag name and logo is valid, Ginn's whole suit is a nonstarter.
gregpolard wrote:Also, where are people reading the full legal document?
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
yeah, but it also mentions Rollins and the 2003 tribute record and the tour he did, as earning money under Ginn's property.
He HAD to sue Henry. If Henry's trademark of the Black Flag name and logo is valid, Ginn's whole suit is a nonstarter.
yeah, but it seems like he is claiming rollins made money off of the WM3 cd and tour, not just the fact that he trademarked it. he seems to be trying to get any money rollins made off of that tour/cd, but it went to charity. rollins didn't trademark the name until 2012, right?
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
gregpolard wrote:Another point of confusion....are Flag selling any Black Flag merchandise at their shows? I didn't believe that they were. But from what I'm gathering from this, it says they have.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:gregpolard wrote:Another point of confusion....are Flag selling any Black Flag merchandise at their shows? I didn't believe that they were. But from what I'm gathering from this, it says they have.
Ginn is alleging that the Flag merchandise they're selling infringes on the Black Flag trademark.
scannest wrote:It's like a filmmaker saying "Spielberg is my idol. Every time I get behind the camera I think about how I can make my film as good as Hook"
xxxMidgexxx wrote:But perhaps I just love drone stuff in general.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:gregpolard wrote:Another point of confusion....are Flag selling any Black Flag merchandise at their shows? I didn't believe that they were. But from what I'm gathering from this, it says they have.
Ginn is alleging that the Flag merchandise they're selling infringes on the Black Flag trademark.
xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:xxxHunterxxx wrote:yourenotevil wrote:
i don't get why he is going after rollins now, 10 years after the fact. that seems petty and pointless. as far as i know, rollins didn't sell any merch at those WM3 shows, and everything went to the charity fund for those guys to have DNA testing done for their case(both the ticket sales and sales of the CD). i think i remember reading that everyone on the tribute cd did it for no money.
He's going after Henry because Henry and Keith trademarked the Black Flag name and logo in 2012. I am now convinced that Ginn reunited Black Flag just to strengthen his position in this litigation. This is going to be fascinating.
yeah, but it also mentions Rollins and the 2003 tribute record and the tour he did, as earning money under Ginn's property.
He HAD to sue Henry. If Henry's trademark of the Black Flag name and logo is valid, Ginn's whole suit is a nonstarter.
yeah, but it seems like he is claiming rollins made money off of the WM3 cd and tour, not just the fact that he trademarked it. he seems to be trying to get any money rollins made off of that tour/cd, but it went to charity. rollins didn't trademark the name until 2012, right?
Yeah, he may have a statute of limitations problem with the portion of the claim that relates to the tour. He may have sued Rollins for the WM3 thing to strengthen his claim against the others or because he's pissed at him for trying to trademark the name and logo. Or maybe he thinks Henry has deeper pockets than the other dudes (which is probably a safe bet). Or he could have done it for 100 other reasons. I can't wait for the defendants to answer.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests