I think there’s a fifth option to consider for completeness’s sake, even though it is much less artistically satisfying: the band is whatever the person or organization that owns the band’s trademark says it is. If whoever owns the trademark of AC/DC says some random kid they find on a playground somewhere is AC/DC now, then that’s what …
I think there’s a fifth option to consider for completeness’s sake, even though it is much less artistically satisfying: the band is whatever the person or organization that owns the band’s trademark says it is. If whoever owns the trademark of AC/DC says some random kid they find on a playground somewhere is AC/DC now, then that’s what AC/DC is, just like Disney gets to decide what is and what isn’t an official Mickey Mouse cartoon (and who is and isn’t legally allowed to use the trademark of Mickey Mouse). That’s the legal reason why I can’t be AC/DC, even if I start a band that plays exclusively AC/DC songs.
The one advantage of this option (which for fans of a band’s music, is certainly outweighed by all the disadvantages) is that intellectual property law usually (though admittedly not always) provides a pretty clear answer to the question.
I agree, and also with Chris's reply to your comment, JJ. That IS the bottom line, literally and figuratively. Chris nails it by saying, yes, it IS unsatisfying, but biz is biz, and while we'd all LOVE to have a purely (and simpler, admittedly) musical resolution to this dilemma, it all boils down to the contract, the legalities, the agreements, the law, the publishing, the ownership, the signature at the bottom of a document.....all those "icky" establishment reasons FAR removed from the actual music we all grew up loving.....and, it's very OK to absolutely abhor that predicament! Rock on!🤘
I think there’s a fifth option to consider for completeness’s sake, even though it is much less artistically satisfying: the band is whatever the person or organization that owns the band’s trademark says it is. If whoever owns the trademark of AC/DC says some random kid they find on a playground somewhere is AC/DC now, then that’s what AC/DC is, just like Disney gets to decide what is and what isn’t an official Mickey Mouse cartoon (and who is and isn’t legally allowed to use the trademark of Mickey Mouse). That’s the legal reason why I can’t be AC/DC, even if I start a band that plays exclusively AC/DC songs.
The one advantage of this option (which for fans of a band’s music, is certainly outweighed by all the disadvantages) is that intellectual property law usually (though admittedly not always) provides a pretty clear answer to the question.
Totally right. Probably the cleanest answer but still unsatisfying. Though if you started telling people you were AC/DC I’d support you
Very unsatisfying. Maybe legally that would be the answer but I believe it's up to the fans.
I agree, and also with Chris's reply to your comment, JJ. That IS the bottom line, literally and figuratively. Chris nails it by saying, yes, it IS unsatisfying, but biz is biz, and while we'd all LOVE to have a purely (and simpler, admittedly) musical resolution to this dilemma, it all boils down to the contract, the legalities, the agreements, the law, the publishing, the ownership, the signature at the bottom of a document.....all those "icky" establishment reasons FAR removed from the actual music we all grew up loving.....and, it's very OK to absolutely abhor that predicament! Rock on!🤘