Awesome New Mike Love Article!!

[Cam Mott]

Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike.  

Sometimes it's not hard to understand why people would have a hard time sympathizing with Mike.  You are talking of what, a thirty+ year grudge even after he won a lawsuit wherein he probably received more money and credit than he deserves?  And he still can't quit bad mouthing a mentally ill man who never really bad mouths him back?

Then he goes on the attack against Al Jardine in a frivolous lawsuit against Brian in regards to Smile?  Despite Al not even being named?  Here are some of the more choice bits from the lawsuit:

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/cassius-love-vs-sonny-wilson-2005-lawsuit-text.67046/

"4. In addition to his songwriting contributions to The Beach Boys, as the longtime front man for the band, Mike Love has been historically recognized as the primary voice and image of The Beach Boys; and Carl Wilson was historically recognized as the musical leader. After Carl’s death in 1998, Alan Jardine announced in the entertainment media that he no longer wished to tour with The Beach Boys; and Mike Love announced privately within BRI that he would no longer tour with Alan Jardine because of Jardine’s long and well documented history of mental and emotional problems, failure to perform, and abusiveness toward other band members. BRI then granted an exclusive license to Mike Love to perform at live concerts using The Beach Boys registered trademark. Since 1998, Mike Love has scrupulously fulfilled his license obligations, using the trademark to perform as The Beach Boys in approximately 150 live concerts per year all over the world. He has paid over eleven million dollars to BRI as royalties on this license.

5. In the same time frame following Carl Wilson’s death, Alan Jardine misappropriated the trademark, bastardized The Beach Boys name, altered the traditional Beach Boys harmonies, line-up and music, defamed Mike Love and The Beach Boys in the media, and then overtly infringed upon the trademark by using it to perform live concerts while duping ticket-buyers into believing it was the BRI-licensed Beach Boys. Jardine wreaked havoc in the marketplace causing BRI to sue for a permanent injunction which was granted and then upheld by the Ninth Circuit in Brother Records, Inc. v Jardine, 318 F.3d 900 (9th Cir. 2003). Although Jardine is still a 25% shareholder and a Director of BRI (receiving 25% of the license revenues), he is an adjudicated infringer who has breached his fiduciary duties to BRI.

6. Like Jardine, Brian Wilson has now with the “give-away” scheme, pursued a path to promote himself, destroy The Beach Boys trademark, and breach his fiduciary duties to BRI and to Mike Love. Historically, these breaches are the continuation of over thirty-five years of conduct by Brian Wilson to damage The Beach Boys and BRI. Between 1961 and 1966 Mike Love and Brian Wilson successfully collaborated with Carl and Dennis Wilson in the creation of hit after hit and album after album in the rapidly growing world of rock and roll music. Mike and Brian are recognized as prodigious song-writing pioneers in the early development of this musical genre. But beginning in 1965, drugs began to destroy Brian Wilson. By 1967, Brian lived either in his bed or in his sand-box in his Beverly Hills mansion. While Mike Love and The Beach Boys were touring without him, Brian was surrounded by drug addicts, drug dealers, parasites, and plagiarizers. In 1967, while Brian was living in an environment of drugs and physical and mental illness, Brian and The Beach Boys created the “Smile” album pursuant to their contract with Capitol Records, and paid for by Capitol. Brian also consulted some of the hangers-on that surrounded him at the time.

7. Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties, including revenues from BRI and his 25% share of Mike Love’s license royalties. Between 1991 and 2002, Brian was under a court-ordered conservatorship, first with a court appointed lawyer until 1995, and then with his just married wife. In 2002, Brian began to resurrect his career by touring with his own band. However his “performance” has been, for the most part, limited by his past mental and emotional problems. In order to promote himself, Brian began to misappropriate BRI property. In 2003, he misappropriated “Pet Sounds,” a Beach Boys album, all while serving as a fiduciary to BRI. In September, 2004, Brian Wilson, without permission or a license from BRI, the owner of Smile, orchestrated the scheme to release a Smile CD. Up until then, Smile had been called the most recognized unreleased album in the history of rock ‘n’ roll. Smile has obtained “secondary meaning” as a Beach Boys property, and historically has been identified with The Beach Boys trademark. The defendants here exploited Mike Love and The Beach Boys’ tie-ins with Brian Wilson and Smile to promote the sale of the Smile CD, The Mail on Sunday newspaper, and the services of BigTime.TV.

Sometimes Mike makes it hard to feel bad for Mike.

EoL

Well, I guess you can be more outraged (or whatever) at Brian's continuing hurt feelings than you are with Mike and his actions that hurt Brian. If you think that is OK?

[Debbie KL]

Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike.  

Sometimes it's not hard to understand why people would have a hard time sympathizing with Mike.  You are talking of what, a thirty+ year grudge even after he won a lawsuit wherein he probably received more money and credit than he deserves?  And he still can't quit bad mouthing a mentally ill man who never really bad mouths him back?

Then he goes on the attack against Al Jardine in a frivolous lawsuit against Brian in regards to Smile?  Despite Al not even being named?  Here are some of the more choice bits from the lawsuit:

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/cassius-love-vs-sonny-wilson-2005-lawsuit-text.67046/

"4. In addition to his songwriting contributions to The Beach Boys, as the longtime front man for the band, Mike Love has been historically recognized as the primary voice and image of The Beach Boys; and Carl Wilson was historically recognized as the musical leader. After Carl’s death in 1998, Alan Jardine announced in the entertainment media that he no longer wished to tour with The Beach Boys; and Mike Love announced privately within BRI that he would no longer tour with Alan Jardine because of Jardine’s long and well documented history of mental and emotional problems, failure to perform, and abusiveness toward other band members. BRI then granted an exclusive license to Mike Love to perform at live concerts using The Beach Boys registered trademark. Since 1998, Mike Love has scrupulously fulfilled his license obligations, using the trademark to perform as The Beach Boys in approximately 150 live concerts per year all over the world. He has paid over eleven million dollars to BRI as royalties on this license.

5. In the same time frame following Carl Wilson’s death, Alan Jardine misappropriated the trademark, bastardized The Beach Boys name, altered the traditional Beach Boys harmonies, line-up and music, defamed Mike Love and The Beach Boys in the media, and then overtly infringed upon the trademark by using it to perform live concerts while duping ticket-buyers into believing it was the BRI-licensed Beach Boys. Jardine wreaked havoc in the marketplace causing BRI to sue for a permanent injunction which was granted and then upheld by the Ninth Circuit in Brother Records, Inc. v Jardine, 318 F.3d 900 (9th Cir. 2003). Although Jardine is still a 25% shareholder and a Director of BRI (receiving 25% of the license revenues), he is an adjudicated infringer who has breached his fiduciary duties to BRI.

6. Like Jardine, Brian Wilson has now with the “give-away” scheme, pursued a path to promote himself, destroy The Beach Boys trademark, and breach his fiduciary duties to BRI and to Mike Love. Historically, these breaches are the continuation of over thirty-five years of conduct by Brian Wilson to damage The Beach Boys and BRI. Between 1961 and 1966 Mike Love and Brian Wilson successfully collaborated with Carl and Dennis Wilson in the creation of hit after hit and album after album in the rapidly growing world of rock and roll music. Mike and Brian are recognized as prodigious song-writing pioneers in the early development of this musical genre. But beginning in 1965, drugs began to destroy Brian Wilson. By 1967, Brian lived either in his bed or in his sand-box in his Beverly Hills mansion. While Mike Love and The Beach Boys were touring without him, Brian was surrounded by drug addicts, drug dealers, parasites, and plagiarizers. In 1967, while Brian was living in an environment of drugs and physical and mental illness, Brian and The Beach Boys created the “Smile” album pursuant to their contract with Capitol Records, and paid for by Capitol. Brian also consulted some of the hangers-on that surrounded him at the time.

7. Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties, including revenues from BRI and his 25% share of Mike Love’s license royalties. Between 1991 and 2002, Brian was under a court-ordered conservatorship, first with a court appointed lawyer until 1995, and then with his just married wife. In 2002, Brian began to resurrect his career by touring with his own band. However his “performance” has been, for the most part, limited by his past mental and emotional problems. In order to promote himself, Brian began to misappropriate BRI property. In 2003, he misappropriated “Pet Sounds,” a Beach Boys album, all while serving as a fiduciary to BRI. In September, 2004, Brian Wilson, without permission or a license from BRI, the owner of Smile, orchestrated the scheme to release a Smile CD. Up until then, Smile had been called the most recognized unreleased album in the history of rock ‘n’ roll. Smile has obtained “secondary meaning” as a Beach Boys property, and historically has been identified with The Beach Boys trademark. The defendants here exploited Mike Love and The Beach Boys’ tie-ins with Brian Wilson and Smile to promote the sale of the Smile CD, The Mail on Sunday newspaper, and the services of BigTime.TV.

Sometimes Mike makes it hard to feel bad for Mike.

EoL

Well, I guess you can be more outraged (or whatever) at Brian's continuing hurt feelings than you are with Mike and his actions that hurt Brian. If you think that is OK?

What did that mean?  I can't even begin to decipher your response.

And re:  the text included in EoL's response, um, nothing?

[Empire Of Love]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

[Cam Mott]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Um, Cam.The Court clearly ruled Mike's above stated greviences had no merit whatsoever and threw out the case!

Once again, you take a crazy "the moon is made of cheese" stance.

[Debbie KL]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Who "misguided" the lawsuit exactly?  And we should just shrug it off, possibly because it was full of questionable dates, events and descriptions? Never mind the time and expense of the people who had to deal with those obvious - shall we say, "inaccuracies."  

You're such an historian - why don't you go check those dates for us?

If a commentary on that lawsuit and others was in your previous post, I have no idea where to find us.  Do enlighten us.

[SMiLE Brian]

The rant against Al shows how petty Mike is through the legal system.

[wilsonart1]

Legendary OSD can you change your name to OST (Oh So True) ?

[Ang Jones]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

EoL seems spot on to me.

[Debbie KL]

Uh-oh!  Where did Cam go?

[SMiLE Brian]

OSD is on point as usual in this thread!

[Cam Mott]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post.  

Um, Cam.The Court clearly ruled Mike's above stated greviences had no merit whatsoever and threw out the case!

Once again, you take a crazy "the moon is made of cheese" stance.

I'm not a lawyer but I believe the judge found Mike's legal claim had no merit and not the background EoL posted. And my post was about offenses against Mike and EoL moved the goalposts to Brian and now holds me responsible I guess. My reply to him applied the principle of my post about Mike to EoL's post about Brian.

Maybe it's your moon that is made of cheese.  

[Cam Mott]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Who "misguided" the lawsuit exactly?  And we should just shrug it off, possibly because it was full of questionable dates, events and descriptions? Never mind the time and expense of the people who had to deal with those obvious - shall we say, "inaccuracies."  

You're such an historian - why don't you go check those dates for us?

If a commentary on that lawsuit and others was in your previous post, I have no idea where to find us.  Do enlighten us.

I'm right here.

You can do as you wish with EoL's post, I didn't express an opinion of the substance of the post.  My reply to him was an attempt to apply the principle of my post (he supposedly was responding to) to the changed subject of EoL's post.

To me the Mike suit EoL references was misguided and shouldn't have been filed so I would lump it in with other Boys' lawsuit where we believe they got bad legal advice when they lose.

[SMiLE Brian]

Baghdad Bob strikes again...

[Cam Mott]

Maybe you missed my original post: "Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike."  Didn't have anything to do with that lawsuit.

I hope that "Baghdad Bob" comment doesn't violate Rule 2 and get you in trouble.   

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Um, Cam.The Court clearly ruled Mike's above stated greviences had no merit whatsoever and threw out the case!

Once again, you take a crazy "the moon is made of cheese" stance.

I'm not a lawyer but I believe the judge found Mike's legal claim had no merit and not the background EoL. And my post was about offenses against Mike and EoL moved the goalposts to Brian and now holds me responsible I guess. My reply to him applied the principle of my post about Mike to EoL's post about Brian.

Maybe it's your moon that is made of cheese.   

The background, in part being, " Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties, including revenues from BRI and his 25% share of Mike Love’s license royalties."? I guess I heard "Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, Friends, Sunflower, Holland,  Surf's Up, solo albums, and on and on" while I was up on my imaginary moon base eating cheese.

Cam, you really are picking the wrong/losing battle trying to defend this despicable escapade by Mike. I mean, what a hypocrite Mike is. Did Brian sue Mike over the blatant Nascar record escapade?

[SMiLE Brian]

Cam, is that a threat?

[Cam Mott]

Cam, is that a threat?

They aren't my rules. Was it a personal attack or insult?

[Debbie KL]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Who "misguided" the lawsuit exactly?  And we should just shrug it off, possibly because it was full of questionable dates, events and descriptions? Never mind the time and expense of the people who had to deal with those obvious - shall we say, "inaccuracies."  

You're such an historian - why don't you go check those dates for us?

If a commentary on that lawsuit and others was in your previous post, I have no idea where to find us.  Do enlighten us.

I'm right here.

You can do as you wish with EoL's post, I didn't express an opinion of the substance of the post.  My reply to him was an attempt to apply the principle of my post (he supposedly was responding to) to the changed subject of EoL's post.

To me the Mike suit EoL references was misguided and shouldn't have been filed so I would lump it in with other Boys' lawsuit where we believe they got bad legal advice when they lose.

Ah, so glad you weren't called away.  It was quite noticeable that you didn't express an opinion "of" the substance of the post by EoL.

Well, heaven knows, Mike's lawsuit about lyrics, no matter how limited they were compared to the work of the entire song, hasn't been addressed enough by the courts, with awards of large sums of money and credit, Mike's endless interviews and posts by his followers here.  No doubt this is the first anyone has heard of it ;-)

I would agree that more than one of the BBs has likely gotten bad legal advice.  However, I doubt an attorney fantasized and then sold to a certain band member the idea of initiating a lawsuit attacking a fellow band member (or 2, that's oddly unclear as well) with extremely questionable assertions and dates.   One might assume that came from the complainant, don't you think, and it certainly doesn't equate to a lousy defense in another suit.  Then you're kind of arguing against your own post, aren't you Cam?

Now I actually do have work to do before family arrives.  But I'll check in later.

[Cam Mott]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Um, Cam.The Court clearly ruled Mike's above stated greviences had no merit whatsoever and threw out the case!

Once again, you take a crazy "the moon is made of cheese" stance.

I'm not a lawyer but I believe the judge found Mike's legal claim had no merit and not the background EoL. And my post was about offenses against Mike and EoL moved the goalposts to Brian and now holds me responsible I guess. My reply to him applied the principle of my post about Mike to EoL's post about Brian.

Maybe it's your moon that is made of cheese.   

The background, in part being, " Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties, including revenues from BRI and his 25% share of Mike Love’s license royalties."? I guess I heard "Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, Friends, Sunflower, Holland,  Surf's Up, solo albums, and on and on" while I was up on my imaginary moon base eating cheese.

Cam, you really are picking the wrong/losing battle trying to defend this despicable escapade by Mike. I mean, what a hypocrite Mike is. Did Brian sue Mike over the blatant Nascar record escapade?

No, as I said, I think it was misguided so I'm not defending any of it, I didn't even comment on it (I commented on your comment about it), it didn't have anything to do with my post as I also pointed out.  

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Maybe you missed my original post: "Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike."  Didn't have anything to do with that lawsuit.

I hope that "Baghdad Bob" comment doesn't violate Rule 2 and get you in trouble.   

Cam, stop fishing to try and get people banned.  The new Board strategy of the Mike Love PR team. 

[Cam Mott]

Standard duck, dodge, evade, red herring, straw man, etc. from Cam.

EoL

Right, says the guy with the Grade A duck, dodge, evade, cherry picked example of a red herring straw man example of a misguided lawsuit with Brian being the offended party and not Mike as in my post. 

Who "misguided" the lawsuit exactly?  And we should just shrug it off, possibly because it was full of questionable dates, events and descriptions? Never mind the time and expense of the people who had to deal with those obvious - shall we say, "inaccuracies."  

You're such an historian - why don't you go check those dates for us?

If a commentary on that lawsuit and others was in your previous post, I have no idea where to find us.  Do enlighten us.

I'm right here.

You can do as you wish with EoL's post, I didn't express an opinion of the substance of the post.  My reply to him was an attempt to apply the principle of my post (he supposedly was responding to) to the changed subject of EoL's post.

To me the Mike suit EoL references was misguided and shouldn't have been filed so I would lump it in with other Boys' lawsuit where we believe they got bad legal advice when they lose.

Ah, so glad you weren't called away.  It was quite noticeable that you didn't express an opinion "of" the substance of the post by EoL.

Well, heaven knows, Mike's lawsuit about lyrics, no matter how limited they were compared to the work of the entire song, hasn't been addressed enough by the courts, with awards of large sums of money and credit, Mike's endless interviews and posts by his followers here.  No doubt this is the first anyone has heard of it ;-)

I would agree that more than one of the BBs has likely gotten bad legal advice.  However, I doubt an attorney fantasized and then sold to a certain band member the idea of initiating a lawsuit attacking a fellow band member (or 2, that's oddly unclear as well) with extremely questionable assertions and dates.   One might assume that came from the complainant, don't you think, and it certainly doesn't equate to a lousy defense in another suit.  Then you're kind of arguing against your own post, aren't you Cam?

Now I actually do have work to do before family arrives.  But I'll check in later.

I also do occasionally eat and sleep and interact with family and friends and work, in case I don't respond quick enough for anyone in some future discussion and they feel compelled to call me out.

I didn't discuss it, it wasn't my point, I'm glad we got that straightened out. 

I don't know about the suit, I just know that it seems we usually blame lost lawsuits or their claims being dismissed on the Boys' lawyers so I assume we will extend the same courtesy to Mike too. I don't think your supposition about the suit makes me arguing with myself.  You might be illustrating my original post though with the lyric lawsuit comments, I'm not sure.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

Cam, is that a threat?

They aren't my rules. Was it a personal attack or insult?

Who in the hell cares? 

[Cam Mott]

Maybe you missed my original post: "Sometimes it feels to me like some people are more outraged (or whatever) at Mike's continuing hurt feelings than they are with the people and actions that hurt Mike."  Didn't have anything to do with that lawsuit.

I hope that "Baghdad Bob" comment doesn't violate Rule 2 and get you in trouble.   

Cam, stop fishing to try and get people banned.  The new Board strategy of the Mike Love PR team. 

By hoping it doesn't get him in trouble?  So did you have any comment for SB about his comment?

[Cam Mott]

Cam, is that a threat?

They aren't my rules. Was it a personal attack or insult?

Who in the hell cares? 

I care about you SB, even if they don't.