For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Mariuana
I read an old story that after Brian left the band, he still could have owned the name "Rolling Stones", was paid pretty much big money but refused to let them use the name. Mick and Keith came up to offer him more but he still would not let them use it because it was his band, he owned the right to it and stuff like this. Keith got angered and pull a knife on him. Then they left and the days after that, Brian was dead.
Quote
MathijsQuote
Mariuana
I read an old story that after Brian left the band, he still could have owned the name "Rolling Stones", was paid pretty much big money but refused to let them use the name. Mick and Keith came up to offer him more but he still would not let them use it because it was his band, he owned the right to it and stuff like this. Keith got angered and pull a knife on him. Then they left and the days after that, Brian was dead.
'I read an old story'....which is utter bullshit.
The band's name was owned by all 5 until Jones was sacked from the band in agreement of a fixed amount of income for as long as the Stones would exist. In 1970 they registered it as a trade mark with the four original members as owners. After Wyman left they rearranged the ownership of Promopub completely so that Jagger, Richards and Watts are directors of the company, owning the rights to all matter Stones.
Mathijs
Quote
Mariuana
I read an old story that after Brian left the band, he still could have owned the name "Rolling Stones", was paid pretty much big money but refused to let them use the name. Mick and Keith came up to offer him more but he still would not let them use it because it was his band, he owned the right to it and stuff like this. Keith got angered and pull a knife on him. Then they left and the days after that, Brian was dead.
By 1969, it'd been clear for years that he was not interested in playing with the band anymore. He would barely show up. His part in recording process had gotten so minor it's hard to distinguish sometimes. Why would he want to do that to his former bandmates especially when given money and offered more. He knew how much it meant to them. They weren't close any longer and there were lot of fights between them but I don't believe Brian was such an ass to put a stop to them being "The Rolling Stones".
Quote
Taylor1
I am curious as to what legal effect or authority did Mick Keith Charlie and Bill have in firing Brian.Since he started the band what if he fired Mick and Keith in 1969, and replaced them with say Jimmy Page and Rod Stewart. I know it sounds ludicrous but could he have done it. And who had the rights to the name Rolling Stones when he was fired
Quote
Taylor1
I am curious as to what legal effect or authority did Mick Keith Charlie and Bill have in firing Brian.Since he started the band what if he fired Mick and Keith in 1969, and replaced them with say Jimmy Page and Rod Stewart. I know it sounds ludicrous but could he have done it. And who had the rights to the name Rolling Stones when he was fired
Quote
2000 LYFHQuote
MathijsQuote
Mariuana
I read an old story that after Brian left the band, he still could have owned the name "Rolling Stones", was paid pretty much big money but refused to let them use the name. Mick and Keith came up to offer him more but he still would not let them use it because it was his band, he owned the right to it and stuff like this. Keith got angered and pull a knife on him. Then they left and the days after that, Brian was dead.
'I read an old story'....which is utter bullshit.
The band's name was owned by all 5 until Jones was sacked from the band in agreement of a fixed amount of income for as long as the Stones would exist. In 1970 they registered it as a trade mark with the four original members as owners. After Wyman left they rearranged the ownership of Promopub completely so that Jagger, Richards and Watts are directors of the company, owning the rights to all matter Stones.
Mathijs
I thought Ronnie around 1990 became a full member? Is there a difference between being a full member and a full member/owner?
What happened to Charlie's ownership piece? Stay in his family or are Mick and Keith the only owners now?
Quote
24FPSQuote
2000 LYFHQuote
MathijsQuote
Mariuana
I read an old story that after Brian left the band, he still could have owned the name "Rolling Stones", was paid pretty much big money but refused to let them use the name. Mick and Keith came up to offer him more but he still would not let them use it because it was his band, he owned the right to it and stuff like this. Keith got angered and pull a knife on him. Then they left and the days after that, Brian was dead.
'I read an old story'....which is utter bullshit.
The band's name was owned by all 5 until Jones was sacked from the band in agreement of a fixed amount of income for as long as the Stones would exist. In 1970 they registered it as a trade mark with the four original members as owners. After Wyman left they rearranged the ownership of Promopub completely so that Jagger, Richards and Watts are directors of the company, owning the rights to all matter Stones.
Mathijs
I thought Ronnie around 1990 became a full member? Is there a difference between being a full member and a full member/owner?
What happened to Charlie's ownership piece? Stay in his family or are Mick and Keith the only owners now?
I think Ronnie became a full member when Bill left in 1993. They probably didn't want another member to leave and jeopardize the band even further.
Quote
2000 LYFH
Wow Rockman, never saw this picture, any other pictures you got I also never saw?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Rockman
UH OH !!!!!!!!!!!!!