gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 08:06:05 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Something I think we need to realize vis-à-vis Mike and the band's name...  (Read 10137 times)
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« on: July 19, 2017, 11:29:49 AM »

I posted something similar in another thread but I think we need to address this on this board, about how Mike as of now has the right to tour as "The Beach Boys" apparently in perpetuity unless something can be changed. And I think what is forgotten is this...

It is sure BRI's fault that Mike Love could quit the band in 2012 and then take the name with him. And by BRI I mean Brian Wilson, Al Jardine, Mike Love and Carl Wilson's estate. So yep, it is, at the very least, 25 percent Brian Wilson's fault. He was safely well into his new life with Melinda when the agreement started for the license with Mike, and he (and Melinda I presume) chose to give Mike the license. There was no gun to their head forcing this set up. They did it.

And maybe now it's too late to change this. But they did make the decision in the late '90s to trade later demand for The Beach Boys name (there woulda been more demand in 2012 if there hadn't been a band touring with the name since 1997) for a stream of income via Mike and Bruce's touring under the name. And I think it's time with reckon with this.

Thoughts are welcome.
Logged
RubberSoul13
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2017, 11:40:56 AM »

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

When Brian returned to the road in the late 90's, should he have taken the name "The Beach Boys" with him...despite being known through music history and pop culture for not touring?

Mike Love has a long list of unscrupulous deeds that he has willingly attached to the name "The Beach Boys" over the last twenty years, but can any of us imagine a "The Beach Boys" concert without him? Songs like "Surfin' USA", "All Summer Long", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Barbara Ann"...they all lose their nostalgic, cornball, schmaltz without Michael Edward Love at the helm of the concert stage.

Fast forward back to the present...I think the demand is just fine. Sure, the venues that either "The Beach Boys" or "Brian Wilson" play don't exceed say approx. 3,000 people BUT, I have never been to a poorly attended concert by either group. Both names have an easy time filling middle-low end professional venues such as theatres, smaller arenas, and amphitheaters.
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2017, 11:46:11 AM »

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

When Brian returned to the road in the late 90's, should he have taken the name "The Beach Boys" with him...despite being known through music history and pop culture for not touring?

Mike Love has a long list of unscrupulous deeds that he has willingly attached to the name "The Beach Boys" over the last twenty years, but can any of us imagine a "The Beach Boys" concert without him? Songs like "Surfin' USA", "All Summer Long", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Barbara Ann"...they all lose their nostalgic, cornball, schmaltz without Michael Edward Love at the helm of the concert stage.

Fast forward back to the present...I think the demand is just fine. Sure, the venues that either "The Beach Boys" or "Brian Wilson" play don't exceed say approx. 3,000 people BUT, I have never been to a poorly attended concert by either group. Both names have an easy time filling middle-low end professional venues such as theatres, smaller arenas, and amphitheaters.


Agreed.  It's the way it's been for 20 years now (with the exception of C50).   I highly doubt the other parties at BRI are in such a huff over the DIA single.
Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2017, 11:49:15 AM »

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

To quote a Michael Edward Love, maybe they coulda "given it a rest" for a while. Is there a rule that a group called "The Beach Boys" has to be out there touring at every single hour of every day? You don't think there might not have been more demand from the average douchebag for new Beach Boys material and/or appearances if that person didn't think "The Beach Boys" had just recently played the Lake City Falls Cheerleading Expo last weekend? You gotta make people miss you. There's a reason why the "Brian's Back" campaign worked, because nobody had seen or heard from Brian in a while.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2017, 12:08:14 PM »

I understand your point, but the thing is that Brian is both: a guy who avoids confrontation/tough emotional stuff, and a guy who doesn’t want to get tied up in a lawsuit with a guy who is VERY litigious. Mike’s prior lawsuits and business dealings have very much an effect that says “don’t f*ck with me”. He wants people to know that if they try to challenge him in ANY way, that he’ll make things a living hell and tie things up in lawsuits until everyone involved has passed away.

Literally, Mike would have his lawyers do all sorts of maneuvers to drain all the money possible from Brian's bank account in order for Brian to have to continually pay Brian's own lawyers as this would drag on and on and on, and it would just be gutwrenching to the max to have this crap lingering on in the background for a non-confrontational guy like Brian.

The alternative is to just not rock the boat. Yes, Brian and Melinda probably love getting checks for nothing; but if they were bugged enough to want to make a move, wouldn’t the specter of what Mike might do legal-wise (which would also cost them TONS of dollars in legal fees) be enough of a deterrent?

I'm sure this is the case.

I cannot for one moment think that Melinda and Brian haven't had a discussion, at least informally, about the possibility of doing such a maneuver... and speaking about what that could entail probably would've ended the discussion right then and there. Not *just* talking about the checks not coming anymore (I'm sure that's a valid consideration), but dealing with what hellish legal crap Mike might do in retaliation. That CAN'T be a non-issue in their mind. No way. If you think about it, that has to at least be *part* of why things have remained the same. Mike and his team of lawyer bullies.

All that aside, I think Brian - who is way too forgiving for his own good - honestly does want Mike to just be happy and perhaps thinks Mike deserves to tour as The BBs. Or at least that thought may have crossed Brian's mind in 1998. Not sure about in late 2012...
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 12:14:42 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2017, 12:10:55 PM »

Absence makes the heart grow fonder
Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2017, 12:19:03 PM »

Mike is ruthless.... Embarrassed
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2017, 12:19:25 PM »

I understand your point, but the thing is that Brian is both: a guy who avoids confrontation/tough emotional stuff, and a guy who doesn’t want to get tied up in a lawsuit with a guy who is VERY litigious. Mike’s prior lawsuits and business dealings have very much an effect that says “don’t f*ck with me”. He wants people to know that if they try to challenge him in ANY way, that he’ll make things a living hell and tie things up in lawsuits until everyone involved has passed away.

Literally, Mike would have his lawyers do all sorts of maneuvers to drain all the money possible from Brian's bank account in order for Brian to have to continually pay Brian's own lawyers as this would drag on and on and on, and it would just be gutwrenching to the max to have this crap lingering on in the background for a non-confrontational guy like Brian.

The alternative is to just not rock the boat. Yes, Brian and Melinda probably love getting checks for nothing; but if they were bugged enough to want to make a move, wouldn’t the specter of what Mike might do legal-wise (which would also cost them TONS of dollars in legal fees) be enough of a deterrent?

I'm sure this is the case.

I cannot for one moment think that Melinda and Brian haven't had a discussion, at least informally, about the possibility of doing such a maneuver, and what that would entail probably ended the discussion right then and there. Not just the checks not coming anymore, but dealing with what hellish legal crap Mike might do in retaliation.


Yeah, but what real legal recourse did Mike have in 1998? Not much, I'm sure. All Brian has to do is say "no Mike, the group is over. Carl died. Maybe in a few years we can get together and do something if the time is right." Instead he and Melinda chose to make easy money. Ain't life funny?  Grin

My guess is that in 1998 Brian maybe just thought that for sure The Beach Boys were over as any kind of music making, contemporary entity, due to the death of Carl and the fact that he was ready to fully be a solo artist. And I think that seeds were planted with the Capitol Records rooftop reunion in 2006 and then when things really started to take off after Brian called Joe Thomas in 2008 (I think) that the idea to bring the group back together and make a new album became a real thing. So one thing lead to another and by summer of 2012, Brian is now fully on board as being a Beach Boy again. And nobody ever needed to push Al in that direction, as he wanted a full reunion probably from the moment Mike pushed him out in 1998. Problem was, Brian (and Melinda) made that fateful decision in 1998. And you will not convince me otherwise that the terms they agreed to were not horrible. There should never have been a set up that allowed Brian and Al to be frozen out of their own band with no recourse.


Absence makes the heart grow fonder

Exactly. It's not just a saying.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 12:21:24 PM by sweetdudejim » Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2017, 12:31:40 PM »

The absence makes the heart go fonder saying can be applied to both bands at the moment.  Both have been doing heavy touring over the last three years. 

Maybe it's his forgiving nature, maybe not, but I think Brian Wilson is fine with Mike and Bruce out there, playing those Beach Boys songs.  The one time only McGrath thing aside, Mike's band plays the songs very well, and with the respect they deserve. 

Granted, I've never asked them, but I have a feeling that Brian, Al, and Carl's family are all OK with the current deal.  I think the fanbase is more bothered about it that the parties involved. 

Besides if somebody from BRI was really that bothered with it, one would think they'd have done something about it by now. 
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2017, 12:34:26 PM »


Yeah, but what real legal recourse did Mike have in 1998? Not much, I'm sure.  


I'm not so sure that's true. I think he would have done EVERYTHING possible to drag things on legally for a long time, especially if Brian didn't agree, and it were a 50/50 split between BRI members agreeing and not agreeing to have Mike get the license.

Plus, keep in mind... Brian was surely in a very difficult place emotionally right after losing his brother and his mother in the span of months. It makes no sense to think he would then start what would be an ugly battle against one of his last blood family members at that moment in time.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 12:35:44 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
RubberSoul13
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2017, 12:54:04 PM »

I agree, time off would have been wise twenty plus years ago (as well as MANY other times throughout their career) but we're talking about a band that hasn't gone more than six months without performing...ever, to my knowledge. What other act can stand up to that?

BUT, it is not twenty years ago. The guys are all approaching or past 75 years old. There isn't exactly much time to "give it a rest". At this stage of the game, I think all parties need to just keep bringing it on stage since they clearly love doing it. Suppose after C50 they had taken four years off and then done a Pet Sounds tour all together. That would've been ENORMOUS, so I get that. But I will be shocked if in the next four years...or rather as they enter their 80's, all four of the touring Beach Boys are happy and healthy and able to be on stage. It is beyond highly unlikely. I'm rambling, but the point is...they should all be doing their thing...would it be better for us if it was just ONE thing? Hell yeah...but it's gone.


Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2017, 12:58:06 PM »

I agree, time off would have been wise twenty plus years ago (as well as MANY other times throughout their career) but we're talking about a band that hasn't gone more than six months without performing...ever, to my knowledge. What other act can stand up to that?

BUT, it is not twenty years ago. The guys are all approaching or past 75 years old. There isn't exactly much time to "give it a rest". At this stage of the game, I think all parties need to just keep bringing it on stage since they clearly love doing it. Suppose after C50 they had taken four years off and then done a Pet Sounds tour all together. That would've been ENORMOUS, so I get that. But I will be shocked if in the next four years...or rather as they enter their 80's, all four of the touring Beach Boys are happy and healthy and able to be on stage. It is beyond highly unlikely. I'm rambling, but the point is...they should all be doing their thing...would it be better for us if it was just ONE thing? Hell yeah...but it's gone.




On the plus side, you can go see two great bands and hear a great selection of BB songs.  By attending six BB or BW shows, I got to see about 80-90 different BB songs. 
Logged
hideyotsuburaya
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: July 19, 2017, 01:01:24 PM »

"There was no gun to their head forcing this set up. They did it."

but there's not a single person on this site who'd say MEL (and that's certainly not Melinda) didn't bully his way into get exactly what he wants from the others (as the record over the many years attests to), including his (last remaining) cousin to whom he fundamentally owes it all to
Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: July 19, 2017, 01:04:53 PM »


Yeah, but what real legal recourse did Mike have in 1998? Not much, I'm sure.  


I'm not so sure that's true. I think he would have done EVERYTHING possible to drag things on legally for a long time, especially if Brian didn't agree, and it were a 50/50 split between BRI members agreeing and not agreeing to have Mike get the license.

Plus, keep in mind... Brian was surely in a very difficult place emotionally right after losing his brother and his mother in the span of months. It makes no sense to think he would then start what would be an ugly battle against one of his last blood family members at that moment in time.

Now CD, I think you are one of the very best posters on this forum, but undoubtably I think there is the instinct in many of us to true to make it so Brian is above any criticism, even if that means infantilizing him to an extent. I feel like, yes, in early 1998 things were rough for Brian, having just lost two main family members. But he did have Melinda by this point, so it's not as if he were rudderless. And still I don't see how it would be an ugly battle. As far a I know (and obviously I know nothing of the legalities), there wouldn't have been any big deal to shutting down the touring operation except for the loss of income to the shareholders (Brian, Al, Mike, Carl's estate). If anything, it was Mike himself breaking up the band, by kicking out the other regular touring founder, one Mr. Alan Jardine. If you read Jon Stebbins' book on David Marks, it basically becomes clear that when Mike returned, sans Al and Carl in 1998 that he basically started a brand new band, just one with the name "The Beach Boys."
Logged
B.E.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2017, 01:08:22 PM »

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

Well, for one...sweetdudejim was suggesting that in the wake of C50 if Brian, Al, and Carl's estate decided to (or possibly even just threatened to) move towards exerting more control over Mike's touring, not renewing the license, or revoking it, then Mike may have decided to compromise and continue the reunion in some fashion. I think that, professionally, touring as "The Beach Boys" is the most important thing to Mike and as a result BRI has a great deal of leverage. I don't buy into the idea that BRI's hands are tied, and I do think that gets lost in the discussion a bit. I wish we knew the details. I'd love to see Mike's licensing agreement. I'm not even convinced that his license is exclusive, but that detail is not important. We don't know the term of the license, but to assume that there isn't a finite term is highly presumptuous IMO. As far as I can tell, it's common practice for a trademark license to automatically renew at the end of each term. No need to vote on it, and it's not much harder to send a non-renewal notice either. Again, I don't know the details, but the idea that Mike has an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable for any reason (including breach) license, is highly unlikely! At that point BRI would have effectively (if not legally) relinquished all rights to their most valuable asset. I understand the advantages to Mike's touring since 1998, especially in regard to Carl's estate, but why dismiss the potential for BRI to monitor Mike's tours more closely? It is literally the obligation of a licensor to do so. It's an ongoing process. They could at least eliminate this confusion between Mike solo material and "The Beach Boys".

As far as CenturyDeprived's points, I agree that Brian is too forgiving (and uninterested) to rock the boat most of the time, but his personality didn't stop him from threatening to revoke Mike's license numerous times in the early 2000s according to Mike's Smile lawsuit. I also think the argument that Mike suing BRI is a significant (if not insurmountable) deterrent is exaggerated. Yes, it's a factor, we are talking about Mike Love, but assuming that BRI has the superior legal position (which is not an unfair assumption considering the details that we know), Mike's lawsuit would fail and it would probably fail with the same relative speed that his Smile lawsuit did.

By the way, in regard to the constant touring...didn't Mike claim that as a condition of his licensing agreement that he must tour continuously? Just an observation.
Logged

Every wave is new until it breaks.
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2017, 01:15:29 PM »


Yeah, but what real legal recourse did Mike have in 1998? Not much, I'm sure.  


I'm not so sure that's true. I think he would have done EVERYTHING possible to drag things on legally for a long time, especially if Brian didn't agree, and it were a 50/50 split between BRI members agreeing and not agreeing to have Mike get the license.

Plus, keep in mind... Brian was surely in a very difficult place emotionally right after losing his brother and his mother in the span of months. It makes no sense to think he would then start what would be an ugly battle against one of his last blood family members at that moment in time.

Now CD, I think you are one of the very best posters on this forum, but undoubtably I think there is the instinct in many of us to true to make it so Brian is above any criticism, even if that means infantilizing him to an extent. I feel like, yes, in early 1998 things were rough for Brian, having just lost two main family members. But he did have Melinda by this point, so it's not as if he were rudderless. And still I don't see how it would be an ugly battle. As far a I know (and obviously I know nothing of the legalities), there wouldn't have been any big deal to shutting down the touring operation except for the loss of income to the shareholders (Brian, Al, Mike, Carl's estate). If anything, it was Mike himself breaking up the band, by kicking out the other regular touring founder, one Mr. Alan Jardine. If you read Jon Stebbins' book on David Marks, it basically becomes clear that when Mike returned, sans Al and Carl in 1998 that he basically started a brand new band, just one with the name "The Beach Boys."

Well thanks, sweetdudejim, I appreciate that and think the same of your posts.

I think it's ultimately a combination of factors that caused the situation to manifest in 1998. Kind of like discussing how SMiLE collapsed, it cannot easily be fingered as being any ONE factor. Lots of things were at play.

-Brian just lost 2 of his immediate family members and probably had no desire to battle another family member
-Brian may not have been "bugged" at that point that Mike was gonna keep the brand name alive and going, purely as a live entity (the lack of Mike getting a recording license for the brand name is telling)
-Brian seemingly had zero desire to be part of the band "The BBs" anymore at that point
-The specter of legal threats, of who knows how/what way that Mike's team could have spun things to drag on for years and years and years, costing millions of dollars
-Brian not wanting to deprive Carl's estate of money if they wanted to keep the money rolling in (see how complicated this family stuff is!)
-Brian and Melinda wanting a check coming in
-Brian not wanting to start any arguments and just wishing to smooth things over and not deal with things

And maybe more factors too. I don't think any of these points above were non-issues. I think they were considered and discussed at some point. Maybe one or two factors were much bigger factors than others, but I think all of them are logical factors as to why Mike got the license in '98.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 01:16:15 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2017, 01:24:22 PM »

Great post CD. And as I'm at work, I'll need a bit to reflect on this, but you do make quite a few good points about how maybe it wouldn't be so easy just to pull the plug on the group.
Logged
Tord
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 162


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 19, 2017, 01:29:42 PM »

Don't know if this is true, but about 15 years ago an insider on the Pet Sounds Mailing List claimed that Brian felt pressured to give the license to Mike, because he still owed him some of the money that Mike won in the lawsuit.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 19, 2017, 01:32:18 PM »

Don't know if this is true, but about 15 years ago an insider on the Pet Sounds Mailing List claimed that Brian felt pressured to give the license to Mike, because he still owed him some of the money that Mike won in the lawsuit.

Would not surprise me one bit.
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 19, 2017, 01:37:13 PM »

Jesus, I did not know that. Mike really had BW in a bind.
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
B.E.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2017, 01:37:41 PM »

Don't know if this is true, but about 15 years ago an insider on the Pet Sounds Mailing List claimed that Brian felt pressured to give the license to Mike, because he still owed him some of the money that Mike won in the lawsuit.

Would not surprise me one bit.

Interesting, Tord. Thanks for sharing! I don't doubt that Brian felt pressured by Mike.
Logged

Every wave is new until it breaks.
Love Thang
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2017, 02:05:00 PM »

It's time for an intervention and a regime change. Gather your pitchforks and torches and meet me at BRI.
Logged
BBs Footage Saga
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 189


FOOTAGE!!!


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2017, 02:07:17 PM »

They must Call Beach Boys Band to Mike, and Beach Boys Orchestra to Brian judging his touring members Razz
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2017, 03:16:07 PM »

It's time for an intervention and a regime change. Gather your pitchforks and torches and meet me at BRI.
Mike is hiding in the club Kokomo "spider hole"
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
RubberSoul13
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: July 19, 2017, 07:05:44 PM »

So, while I totally agree that Mike is a total asshole...what is it that you all are exactly suggesting?

Do you think Brian Wilson should be able to tour as "The Beach Boys" instead of Brian Wilson? I can't see this resolving anything.

Do you think NO ONE should tour as "The Beach Boys"? I wouldn't be opposed to this, but Mike and Bruce would just about fall off the face of the earth without it.
Logged
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.564 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!