Bruce on not showing Al, Brian and Dave in shows

[kiwi surfer]

RE: The license: I have it from an impeccable authority that there has NEVER been a vote about the license since it was granted.

I believe that is accurate. However, for the sake of clarity, there was an original vote 3/1 in July 1998 to issue non-exclusive licences (on the suggestion of Carl Wilson's estate). It's thereafter it all turned pear shaped with it even being disputed that Alan Jardine ever had a licence of any description. Even if he had, it expired by its own terms on 31 December 1999.

[HeyJude]

RE: The license: I have it from an impeccable authority that there has NEVER been a vote about the license since it was granted.

I believe that is accurate. However, for the sake of clarity, there was an original vote 3/1 in July 1998 to issue non-exclusive licences (on the suggestion of Carl Wilson's estate). It's thereafter it all turned pear shaped with it even being disputed that Alan Jardine ever had a licence of any description. Even if he had, it expired by its own terms on 31 December 1999.

So, even though at this stage it means next to nothing, the implication or assertion that Al was among those who "voted to give Mike the license" is incorrect. I just want to highlight this point one more time, as there has been a lot of explaining away of Mike having the license with assertions that all of the other BRI members "let it happen." Al apparently made a futile attempt to vote against it, and there seem to be multiple indications now that no vote has ever occurred since that vote back in 1998 or so. I will also acknowledge that we don't know why Al voted the way he did; he may have been voting more against one exclusive license than voting against Mike having any sort of license.

Whether it's at all correct or not, Al has often spoken of Mike having use of the name as if he (Al) has no control over it. Al technically has had a say, but this also seems to reinforce the idea that he has always been the minority vote.

[HeyJude]

I wonder if the existence of the "Love and Mercy" biopic has something to do with Mike not wanting to continue his relationship with Brian in a touring group or recording studio?  His tour dates next summer in the UK, already announced, may coincide with the release date of that movie (I've seen a couple of other films done at the same time announce summer '14 release dates). Maybe he got ahold of the script prior to production and he doesn't come off too well in it.

Setting aside the irony of this possibility in light of Mike's involvement in the 2000 TV movie helmed by Stamos, I would tend to doubt Mike's actions in relation to the reunion had anything to do with the biopic. Based on what I've read, it's not even a standard biopic the way the other two TV movies about the BB's were. It appears to pinpoint specific eras in Brian's life, and also sounds like it could well involve Landy much more than the other BB's. The movie planning was also well under way during the reunion, so I'd tend to doubt that, if Brian and his camp had the idea that continuing the reunion was at all possible, that he'd pull another stunt like the fake autobiography and be involved in some project that makes the other band members look like a-holes.

[kiwi surfer]

RE: The license: I have it from an impeccable authority that there has NEVER been a vote about the license since it was granted.

I believe that is accurate. However, for the sake of clarity, there was an original vote 3/1 in July 1998 to issue non-exclusive licences (on the suggestion of Carl Wilson's estate). It's thereafter it all turned pear shaped with it even being disputed that Alan Jardine ever had a licence of any description. Even if he had, it expired by its own terms on 31 December 1999.

So, even though at this stage it means next to nothing, the implication or assertion that Al was among those who "voted to give Mike the license" is incorrect. I just want to highlight this point one more time, as there has been a lot of explaining away of Mike having the license with assertions that all of the other BRI members "let it happen." Al apparently made a futile attempt to vote against it, and there seem to be multiple indications now that no vote has ever occurred since that vote back in 1998 or so. I will also acknowledge that we don't know why Al voted the way he did; he may have been voting more against one exclusive license than voting against Mike having any sort of license.

Whether it's at all correct or not, Al has often spoken of Mike having use of the name as if he (Al) has no control over it. Al technically has had a say, but this also seems to reinforce the idea that he has always been the minority vote.

The original 3/1 vote to issue non-exclusive licences was Jardine/Wilson/Estate in favour and Love against. BRI declined, however, to sign a contract authorising Jardine also to use the trademark "Beach Boys".

[absinthe_boy]

It was astonishing - the whole was immeasurably greater than the sum of the parts, and pretty much every aspect of C50 turned out better than anyone dared hope. As for "now or never", sorry but that parade's gone by: it was "then or never", and they chose then. For that, we should be eternally grateful - because it will never happen again, at that level and that pitch of excitement, anticipation and fear-tinged expectation. Chances are, it will never happen again. I can live with that, I have the golden memories of 2012.*

[* provided I never listen to the appalling live album]

I'm with you there. I've not even listened to the whole thing.

I have the memories of Wembley, and the honour of attending probably the last concert ever given by the "full" Beach Boys. They pulled off the C50, with a pretty good LP and a great tour. We have a lot to be thankful for in that respect. It could have been a lot worse.

Would I go see them if they all toured together again? Probably, yes. But the anticipation and occasion could not realistically be the same as 2012.

[HeyJude]

RE: The license: I have it from an impeccable authority that there has NEVER been a vote about the license since it was granted.

I believe that is accurate. However, for the sake of clarity, there was an original vote 3/1 in July 1998 to issue non-exclusive licences (on the suggestion of Carl Wilson's estate). It's thereafter it all turned pear shaped with it even being disputed that Alan Jardine ever had a licence of any description. Even if he had, it expired by its own terms on 31 December 1999.

So, even though at this stage it means next to nothing, the implication or assertion that Al was among those who "voted to give Mike the license" is incorrect. I just want to highlight this point one more time, as there has been a lot of explaining away of Mike having the license with assertions that all of the other BRI members "let it happen." Al apparently made a futile attempt to vote against it, and there seem to be multiple indications now that no vote has ever occurred since that vote back in 1998 or so. I will also acknowledge that we don't know why Al voted the way he did; he may have been voting more against one exclusive license than voting against Mike having any sort of license.

Whether it's at all correct or not, Al has often spoken of Mike having use of the name as if he (Al) has no control over it. Al technically has had a say, but this also seems to reinforce the idea that he has always been the minority vote.

The original 3/1 vote to issue non-exclusive licences was Jardine/Wilson/Estate in favour and Love against. BRI declined, however, to sign a contract authorising Jardine also to use the trademark "Beach Boys".

Ahh, okay, I remember reading about that vote in the legal filings and whatnot back then. So there was another vote after that 1998 vote? Mike’s license is now exclusive apparently, so I’m curious if a vote was taken up to solidify this, and if so, how that vote went down.

But based on the 3-1 vote scenario you describe, neither Brian nor Al voted for Mike to have an exclusive license in that particular vote. I’m the first to agree that multiple non-exclusive licenses was a dumb idea; it would have never worked long term.

But I’m just trying to grasp the assertion that Al, given the bitterness he professed in the first several years after his departure from the band, ever voted in favor of Mike having an exclusive license.

[Nicko1234]

Ahh, okay, I remember reading about that vote in the legal filings and whatnot back then. So there was another vote after that 1998 vote? Mike’s license is now exclusive apparently, so I’m curious if a vote was taken up to solidify this, and if so, how that vote went down.

But based on the 3-1 vote scenario you describe, neither Brian nor Al voted for Mike to have an exclusive license in that particular vote. I’m the first to agree that multiple non-exclusive licenses was a dumb idea; it would have never worked long term.

But I’m just trying to grasp the assertion that Al, given the bitterness he professed in the first several years after his departure from the band, ever voted in favor of Mike having an exclusive license.

I sincerely doubt he ever did.

I think Brian and Carl's estate voted with Mike simply because he was willing to pay and Al wasn't.

[bgas]

Ahh, okay, I remember reading about that vote in the legal filings and whatnot back then. So there was another vote after that 1998 vote? Mike’s license is now exclusive apparently, so I’m curious if a vote was taken up to solidify this, and if so, how that vote went down.

But based on the 3-1 vote scenario you describe, neither Brian nor Al voted for Mike to have an exclusive license in that particular vote. I’m the first to agree that multiple non-exclusive licenses was a dumb idea; it would have never worked long term.

But I’m just trying to grasp the assertion that Al, given the bitterness he professed in the first several years after his departure from the band, ever voted in favor of Mike having an exclusive license.

I sincerely doubt he ever did.

I think Brian and Carl's estate voted with Mike simply because he was willing to pay and Al wasn't.

More likely they voted for Mike's license because it's a known "product" and the smart thing to do for the $$.

[Rocky Raccoon]

Mike having the license is simply what made sense at the time.  Carl had died, Al got fed up with Mike and left, Brian hadn't toured in years.  It's only natural based on those facts that Mike would be the man to continue touring as the Beach Boys if anyone was to do so at all.  Honesty, I think they should have just retired the name as a touring entity completely but clearly that was not in the cards.

[The Shift]

It was astonishing - the whole was immeasurably greater than the sum of the parts, and pretty much every aspect of C50 turned out better than anyone dared hope. As for "now or never", sorry but that parade's gone by: it was "then or never", and they chose then. For that, we should be eternally grateful - because it will never happen again, at that level and that pitch of excitement, anticipation and fear-tinged expectation. Chances are, it will never happen again. I can live with that, I have the golden memories of 2012.*

[* provided I never listen to the appalling live album]

I'm with you there. I've not even listened to the whole thing.

I have the memories of Wembley, and the honour of attending probably the last concert ever given by the "full" Beach Boys. They pulled off the C50, with a pretty good LP and a great tour. We have a lot to be thankful for in that respect. It could have been a lot worse.

Would I go see them if they all toured together again? Probably, yes. But the anticipation and occasion could not realistically be the same as 2012.

I think the occasional one-off might generate some excitement and even endear them all to the fans again. Maybe a gig - say, a big fundraiser - every couple of years.





They can play for my 50th birthday in Stainforth village hall, for example.

[SMiLE Brian]

John, can we have a BBs convention at the village hall?

[Awesoman]

I think the occasional one-off might generate some excitement and even endear them all to the fans again. Maybe a gig - say, a big fundraiser - every couple of years.

I don't think that's a bad idea.  If the surviving members did a couple of shows a year together, I think that would be more satisfying than the current line-up.  Mike and Bruce could then spend the rest of the year performing with the "Cheap Boys". 

[Cam Mott]

My memory of the court docs is BRI negotiated and did award or intended to award an exclusive license to Mike. Al threatened to sue. Carl's estate suggested non-exclusive licenses which were offered to the principles at the terms set for the exclusive license they withdrew from Mike. Al insisted on preferential terms for his non-exclusive, BRI offered terms better then the Mike license terms but Al apparently unilaterally drew up his own contract and signed it but BRI did not and Al was left without a BRI license. He then tried various methods to circumvent a license and got sued by BRI. Maybe that's why BRI has not made any moves to change the license.