Some absolute toerag has stolen and trademarked the Bonzos’ name, the name they have been using since 1960-whatever, and they’re no longer allowed to use it. All perfectly legal apparently. Said toerag is now suing them for illegal use of their own name.
They’re crowfunding to fight it, a most worthy cause. I’ve lobbed in some GBP, and it would be good if all like-minded Bonzoids did the same. This aggression will not stand, man.
Full details at the link.
Bachelor Johnny Cool ->
I’m going to trademark “U2”
Oi! Bonionio, where the heck is Bono? Put your hand in your pocket you rich git! Lob some cash to the campaign!
Come to that, where’s Macca? Come on sunshine, dig deep! Or I’ll trademark The Beatles and sue you.
Oh yes, and where’s Adele hiding? The richest woman in music it seems. Well, it’s time to stump up young lady, come on, make that pledge.
I suppose this points up the fact that if you have a band you’d better trademark the name before someone else does and sues you for using it.
You used the word “band”! That’ll be thirty grand please, you trademark-traducing fiend!
Heard about this last year from John Halsey at the Rutles gig.
Glad they’re going to court about it, however this shouldn’t have been allowed to happen.
This is on top of Neil Innes’ problems with Pledge earlier this year.
Spoke to Neil about that and he was most apologetic despite it not being his fault, through talking to him I was able to get my money back from my bank. I’d already re-pledged some money to help allow him to record the lost album.. I shall add the money I got back to the Bonzos court case.
As is mentioned on the page, it’s a legal loophole. Where else in the world can you trademark something without it being researched (or providing proof of your ownership)? In Germany and other EU countries it takes up to 12 months (and LOTS of paperwork) to register a name or a logo.
These kind of things didn’t happen when the music business was run by “respectable criminals” (as a musician friend likes to call them)… 😉
Dinsdale’s boys would never ‘ave stood for it.
I guess the Bonzos are firmly in the ‘not nearly as rich as you think’ bracket as the amount to be raised isn’t that large. This is absolutely iniquitous though – how can this be allowed?
I was never under any illusion that The Bonzos were anything more than struggling low-to-middle echelon musicians.
Neil Innes is probably reasonably comfortably-off as long as he or his missus don’t get expensively ill or have their house burn down. Vivian Stanshall’s heirs probably get an income from his royalties. Those two were the songwriters and therefore higher earners than the rest of the band. I imagine the pickings for the rest of the chaps have been pretty slim over the years.
I feel sorry for Apollo C. Vermouth. Not only does he produce the band illegally known as The Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band’s biggest hit in ‘I’m The Urban Spaceman’, but he disappears,and is never heard from again, before he can financially benefit from the song’s success.
Probably chewing a dry crust somewhere. Shame, for a moment he had a shot.
A dry crust? He should be so lucky (lucky, lucky, lucky).
Just to add that this was more of a general comment really, based on something Heppy said a while ago. We sort of assume that anyone who has made records with reasonable commercial success will be doing OK, but this absolutely confirms that is not (always) the case. I’ve interviewed a number of musicians in recent years and they nearly always tell (or hint at) a story of being ripped off.
I suppose ‘financial success’ is all relative, really. There are probably more than a few of us who would love to be in a ‘commercially succesful’ band such as the Bonzos, and all the creative freedom that (possibly) comes with it (i.e. no Monday to Friday 9-5 drudgery).
I’m going to speculate that there are 3 levels that musicians operate at these days:
Very famous, still make good money from recordings and live shows.
Mid level: streaming royalties help, not like the old days of CDs but still have to play live a lot to make a half decent living.
The rest: Do everything yourself. Book gigs, order, sell, pack and dispatch merchandise, look after Facebook and website.
I’ve heard it said that an act can make an ok living with a relatively small number of committed fans who buy the CD, go to as many gigs as possible, buy the T Shirt etc but it seems like it’s a full time job really. If you apply that model to a band rather than a solo artist, the money gets spread pretty thin.
I’m guessing there’s quite a bit of 9-5 drudgery involved in keeping a band like the Bonzos on the road. I suppose it’s possible they still have representation, but equally possible they do it all themselves, or get help from supportive family members.
The 40th anniversary tour was a big one, then a falling out after a gig in London after which they toured a 3 Bonzo and a Piano.
The 50th tour was budget Bonzo they hoped to tour again but the person organising the tour had a falling out and passed it on to the person who has now ‘copyrighted’ the name. IIRC
Hopefully it will get sorted in their favour.
I’m sure it was DH, quite some years back, who said he first interviewed Greg Lake at his mansion in Surrey.
The second interview took place in a semi in Chingford.
Maybe Greg Lake wanted to go to DH’s house the second time round?
DH lives in Southgate.
Sigh, it was a joke.
Really?
I don’t get it. The article says: “… ticking a box that confirms they are the owner of the name.” But the person who trademarked the name isn’t the owner and surely 53 years’ worth of recordings proves that. Why isn’t the applicant getting done for fraud?
Shocking.
I have nothing to say on this subject. I would merely like to ruin Mike The P’s claim to 18 comment consistancy, purely for the sake of doing so. Thank you.
Troublemaker!
And thank you! Proud, humbled, etc.
Two bands called The Bonzos… they’re gonna need two separate gorillas.
Well it’s never stopped Barclay James Harvest. More’s the pity. (Sorry @bargepole )