So PG, would you mind speculating a little bit for a layman like myself? I知 just curious about what it was that MP would be suing them over. Like, would it be trying to get some kind of lump sum? Or maybe a royalty on a certain number of albums after he was out? In your experience, what would have been plausible? You had said in the MP Forum post that it was too late in the game to try and take the name, so I知 assuming it wouldn稚 have been that.
Rather than write another long post myself, let me direct you back to the thread at MP's site. There's a LOT of garbage in that thread, but go to page 2 and take a look at post number 70 by Paul Sommer. In that post, he quotes verbatim from the "Notice" section of the summons. It's worth reading The allegations that likely would have been the basis of a complaint are in there. In short: (1) defendants "wrongfully excluded" MP from the band; and (2)/(3) defendants are wrongfully using the band name in connection with the recording of an album and a promotional tour. MP was seeking declaratory and injunctive relief (essentially a court order preventing DT from doing what was alleged) and whatever monetary damages were found to be appropriate.
Next, take a look at Stadler's post #95 on p. 3 of the thread. He explained that "wrongfully excluded" is a bit of a term of art. I don't necessarily agree with some of Stadler's admitted speculation about MP's motives, but I think he was mostly right, which I think is reflected in my post #188 on p. 5 of the thread. In a nutshell, MP's claims likely were based on various contracts between the band members and the organizing documents of the two corporations, none of which we ever have seen or likely ever will see. In particular, a band agreement, if properly drafted, would talk about what would happen upon a member leaving the band (both in terms of rights to the names and trademarks but also in terms of money).
As for MP's ultimate goal, I can only guess, but I assume it would be the most favorable financial package in connection with him giving back his interest in the two corporations (the buyout that I mentioned previously in this thread). My point about being "too late in the game to try and take the name" was that, if he had really wanted the injunctive relief mentioned in the summons, he should (I used the word "would") have filed something before ADTOE was released and the tour started. He certainly COULD HAVE tried to get an injunction on a going forward basis, but I read the fact that nothing had been done earlier or in earnest as a signal that this wasn't his true goal. I also commented about the fact that it was odd that the summons had been filed in April (2011) but did not surface publicly until September (another indication that, by the time of the Blabbermouth article, they were working things out).
Poll
Topic: If you could be a fly on the wall (that could also time-travel)... (Read 4248 times)