518 replies to this topic

[Fuzhi]

That was before Garcia and Bjork tried (or not?) to claim the name 'Kyuss'.

Read the Roling Stones article they will name the next album "Kyuss Lives" not Kyuss. They have not (at least according to themselves) at any time wanted to name themselves Kyuss.

[Mellie]

Read it. True, but like I earlier said, I don't take much what Garcia/Bjork say for granted. Brant sounds like a total cock in that Rolling Stone article.

[Fuzhi]

Try to read it again then. If you think Brant sounds like a total cock your reading skills are very poor.

[sheep]

Any "legal" authority of the name is laughable  

The trademark is invalid as it stands. Brant has no problem calling the band just "kyuss" BUT out of enormous respect for Josh the band is simply "kyuss lives!"

[botley]

That was before Garcia and Bjork tried (or not?) to claim the name 'Kyuss'.

Read the Roling Stones article they will name the next album "Kyuss Lives" not Kyuss. They have not (at least according to themselves) at any time wanted to name themselves Kyuss.

Homme/Reeder's lawsuit was filed in specific reference to a trademark application to claim the name. Just because the band didn't trademark the name when Brant was still in the band doesn't make it right for him to take it from its rightful owners.

Exclusive rights are a fucking nasty business but that is the nature of the beast. You gotta make a stand and use 'em or lose 'em forever.

[Diesel]

black liquorice..

[WolfJazz]

i haven't slept, waaaay too damn tired but i'm under the impression from what i read earlier that you had to pay extra for a vip ticket to have a meet and greet with kyuss lives? that right?

[Mellie]

Try to read it again then. If you think Brant sounds like a total cock your reading skills are very poor.

Oh yeah. Being "bullied" for twenty years by Josh sounds piss-poor to me. Also the claim about Scott. My reading skills are quite good. Brant is just bitter about Kyuss. Try reading this.

This "It was kind off ridiculous to see Brant talk about Double Standards after his Low Desert Punk record selling business though. Really Brant - send me back my cash for the goods you failed to deliver and I might actually believe a word you are saying." quote made me giggle (comment @Rolling Stone) It's not the first time that I read that actually.

[tombebop]

Surely the band Brant formed was 'Sons of Kyuss'? which when you listen to their first record (production values aside) is quite different to the collaboration that evolved into Kyuss as most of us know.

Garcia only did this to promote his own record a million years in the making as stated several times. Surely by now they cant be having much fun... if they really cared about the music they could have just released a new album under the name Sons of Kyuss, maybe Katzenjammer?... toured the new stuff and played a few old songs for the fun, not ride this cash cow into the ground.

I'm sure Josh isn't squeaky clean either, the whole thing is just a childish mess but fingers crossed all this emotion and anger flying around brings us some good music in the future from both sides.

[Geohound]

Try to read it again then. If you think Brant sounds like a total cock your reading skills are very poor.

Oh yeah. Being "bullied" for twenty years by Josh sounds piss-poor to me. Also the claim about Scott. My reading skills are quite good. Brant is just bitter about Kyuss. Try reading this.

This "It was kind off ridiculous to see Brant talk about Double Standards after his Low Desert Punk record selling business though. Really Brant - send me back my cash for the goods you failed to deliver and I might actually believe a word you are saying." quote made me giggle (comment @Rolling Stone) It's not the first time that I read that actually.

This is true. I ordered Gods and Goddesses from there and never got anything. trucks and I exchanged emails with some guy that ran the online store or something, and despite multiple reassurances that it was being taken care of, nothing happened.

[funkypunk]

short version:
josh wants money from a successful touring band whose setlist consists of ~75% of his songs. scandalous!

He'll get money from any song that is played that he has a songwriting credit on, period. The PRI and it's equivalents will be collecting it on his behalf same as they do with radio play.  

As someone said above, if they carry on they should just stick to songs they either wrote or co-wrote themselves, which would include a surprising number of the favourites.

@ tombepop - they can't use the name Katzenjammer anymore, there's another band with that name now and they've copyrighted and trademarked it.

I now just wanna see handbags fly in the courtroom after all those press releases and ante-upping.

[lorelei]

Same question over and over. Since everyone was in a great mood 10 months ago, WHY NOT ASK JOSH, SCOTT AND FREDO to extend the trademark to Brant and Nick and Chris instead of trying to copyright Kyuss on their own? That's the question. Then it would have been way easier to make Josh look bad if he'd said no.

[sheep]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ8U4Zyff10

Playing one of the biggest hits, WITHOUT Scott, Nick, and Fredo...

[scarfaceclaw]

This is true. I ordered Gods and Goddesses from there and never got anything. trucks and I exchanged emails with some guy that ran the online store or something, and despite multiple reassurances that it was being taken care of, nothing happened.

I think the main guy's name who ran the store on Brant's behalf was Cale Bunker. I also had some problems with stuff I ordered, but he got it sorted in the end. I can't find any reference to it anymore, but when the site/fb page was still live, Cale posted a note apologising for any problems as they had been compromised by another employee ripping them off.
But obviously, you need fulfill/refund committments to your customers, and I'm surprised if they didn't.

This "It was kind off ridiculous to see Brant talk about Double Standards after his Low Desert Punk record selling business though. Really Brant - send me back my cash for the goods you failed to deliver and I might actually believe a word you are saying." quote made me giggle (comment @Rolling Stone) It's not the first time that I read that actually.

See above. Nothing excuses poor service from a brand you attach your name to - live and die by the sword etc.
But imo, to link supposed "double standards" of Low Desert Punk to the current lawsuit seems a little tenuous.
Same with anecdotes about Josh supposedly being an adulterer or an asshole, or a really great guy who shouts drinks all evening.
Aspects of character that don't directly relate to the formation and use of the trademark shouldn't have any bearing on who we consider deserves to be in the right.

[sheep]

Evidence piece #1: Since this trademark established in January 1994 is legitimate and the "original partners" came together in July 1992. How was an album released in September 1991 with a group publishing credit, released under the identical name Kyuss? Half of the people listed on the trademark aren't on the album either?!?

[Boognish Bockwinkle]

and



might have something to say about who owns "Kyuss"

[Mellie]

Evidence piece #1: Since this trademark established in January 1994 is legitimate and the "original partners" came together in July 1992. How was an album released in September 1991 with a group publishing credit, released under the identical name Kyuss? Half of the people listed on the trademark aren't on the album either?!?

If that's such an issue, Brant should have never LEFT the band in the first place. Bands change their line-ups. And if you weren't there, you weren't.

[lorelei]

Evidence piece #1: Since this trademark established in January 1994 is legitimate and the "original partners" came together in July 1992. How was an album released in September 1991 with a group publishing credit, released under the identical name Kyuss? Half of the people listed on the trademark aren't on the album either?!?

Still not answering my simple question, I see.

[sheep]

Scott Reeder's belief he is some sort of Kyuss founder is both pompous and arrogant. Nick has never even dreamed of trying to imply such things. Scott is simply a hired gun, no more, no less. Hopefully when his name is stripped from the trademark he'll understand the importance in starting a band rather than joining a band.

[Mellie]

I beg to differ. Scott has had a good influence on the bass sound of Kyuss. He's not a founder, that's true. I don't consider him as one. Nick's behaviour to Scott wasn't that nice too. Care to elaborate on that?

[Mellie]

You're arrogant when you're talking about Scott.... .John. He is more than a hired gun. Found that particulary offensive for Reeder.

[sheep]

I beg to differ. Scott has had a good influence on the bass sound of Kyuss. He's not a founder, that's true. I don't consider him as one. Nick's behaviour to Scott wasn't that nice too. Care to elaborate on that?

Nick didn't want to get embarrassed on stage by Scott's incredible ability. Being a guest star at the Wiltern gig wasn't enough, he just had to be on stage with Nick to prove whose better.When he was denied, he threw a temper tantrum.

[lorelei]

Scott Reeder's belief he is some sort of Kyuss founder is both pompous and arrogant. Nick has never even dreamed of trying to imply such things. Scott is simply a hired gun, no more, no less. Hopefully when his name is stripped from the trademark he'll understand the importance in starting a band rather than joining a band.

Still not answering my simple question, I see.

[fifiroxy]

fuck It
I'm not even a kyuss fan, but I can see that no one is going to come out of this looking good and the memory/ reputation of Kyuss is being trashed by both sides

It's all very tragic and makes everyone involved look petty and bitchy
Someone needs to bang their heads together
Nick step up, it's your time!
Unlikely Diplomatic Envoy of the Millenium

[lorelei]

I beg to differ. Scott has had a good influence on the bass sound of Kyuss. He's not a founder, that's true. I don't consider him as one. Nick's behaviour to Scott wasn't that nice too. Care to elaborate on that?

Nick didn't want to get embarrassed on stage by Scott's incredible ability. Being a guest star at the Wiltern gig wasn't enough, he just had to be on stage with Nick to prove whose better.When he was denied, he threw a temper tantrum.

Yeah, and he wasn't even invited at the afterparty, probably because Scott's just a dominant asshole who wanted to shame Nick. A dominant asshole who came as soon as KL needed him when Nick got in trouble and allowed them to play a few gigs, dropping everything to fly across the planet and get familiar again with stuff he hadn't played for years.
My god, what a bastard.

[fifiroxy]

So if the judge does a little backround research before making his final judgement..
I hope he has the sense to declare VERDICT Retarded
And tell someone to put the lotion in the basket

[JDizzle787]

I'm glad they at least put forth what seems to be a very honest perspective. I don't doubt what either of them are saying, but that sort of shit can build up over time and become embellished. So what if Josh was aggressive in songwriting at times? I've been saying from the start that a huge problem with Kyuss reuniting in any way without Josh is that whether you like it or not, he was a huge part of Kyuss, both with the overall sound, a decent chunk of the songwriting and in taking care of what he put his effort into. Maybe he's more scrupulous than the others in protecting his "assets" and his history.

I have nothing to say on their personal interactions as I don't know any of them personally, but it seems as though these are old feelings and issues that are resurfacing, and maybe nothing has really changed between them in the past 15 or so years.

[fifiroxy]

Regardless of who is wrong or right, or what nasty things are being said in public
unless you are super squeaky clean you ideally would avoid putting yourself under the scrutiny of a prosecution lawyer
Because things can get pretty ugly and irrelevant
And it's all on record
Specially when it comes to what seems like a quite nebulous/ volatile time in ones life where it is like literally playground politics
I mean unless this is all going to be hashed out by lawyers and no one has to mention how stoned anyone may or may not have been at the time of rehearsals/ recordings/ decision making

[mikelb7]

Same question over and over. Since everyone was in a great mood 10 months ago, WHY NOT ASK JOSH, SCOTT AND FREDO to extend the trademark to Brant and Nick and Chris instead of trying to copyright Kyuss on their own? That's the question. Then it would have been way easier to make Josh look bad if he'd said no.

This, and basically everything else lorelei's said. Sheep, we argued early in this topic and I gotta admit I was definitely tugging on Josh's nutsack a little too hard. At the same time, you're just trolling now. Call it jealousy, selfishness, greed (things both sides are definitely guilty of)... none of this changes the trademark dropped in 1994 which is exactly what the lawsuit is about. Should Brant be on the trademark? Absolutely. But you gotta approach these things legally, otherwise you get sued. Things were cool 10 months ago, and Josh let shows go on for around a year without any threat of legal action. One kind of has to assume that something set him off, like trying to steal a trademark behind someone's back.

As Brant said, he left as a confused 19 year old and totally ignored the realities of the record industry, such as trademarking and publishing. In life, sometimes you end up paying for your mistakes, even those made 'trying to keep it real' as a teenager. Brant also talks about being obligated to Nick after jamming at Hellfest, as opposed to bringing in Scott. Another big mistake, because with Scott in the band, they would've fulfilled the requirement of having 2/3 trademark holders in the band. They could have called themselves Kyuss (proper) and Josh wouldn't have a single legal recourse. At the same time, we all know that Brant and Scott had some troubles getting along. Kyuss Lives had a couple of chances to take the name in an easy and legal manner. They chose not to, and as it turns out, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

This whole thing just fucking sucks in general though. To see so many of my favourite and most respected musicians (namely Josh, Brant and Scott) act in this way is depressing. Even moreso when you consider it's been 5 years since new Queens, 2 years since new Brant solo stuff and we haven't heard a riff of new Kyuss-whateveryouwanttocallitnow. Looks like we're the real losers in all of this.

[mikelb7]

Any "legal" authority of the name is laughable  

The trademark is invalid as it stands. Brant has no problem calling the band just "kyuss" BUT out of enormous respect for Josh the band is simply "kyuss lives!"

Please explain, since you seem to understand all of this so well.

Pretty sure if his trademark was invalid, Josh wouldn't be able to sue people for violating it.