Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   Ima Fish (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 12:57pm

   
   

   The Sex Pistols were purely a marketing gimmick and a source of revenue committed against this planet by Malcolm McLaren. They were as "punk rock" as Sigue Sigue Sputnik or Frankie Goes to Hollywood, pure fashion and contrived "shock" in lieu of any substance.
   
   To argue that the Sex Pistols were somehow above monetary gain shows you know absolutely nothing about their origins or history.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Free Capitalist (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 12:58pm

   
   

   Not that there have been any real punks for over three decades, but it's unclear if the survivors are pressing this or if "the sex pistols holding company" Glitterbest engineered this claim.
   
   Anyone know if Rotten is actively trying to retire or is this just a turn of the wheel to which the remaining members long ago sold out?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Re:

   

   Free Capitalist (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 1:00pm

   
   

   Sid was too high to sell out, but yeah... pretty much what Fish said.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 1:16pm

   
   

   If it was just called "god save the cream" it would be fine... adding the name of the band does suggest some sort of affiliation or approval, which apparently isn't the case.
   
   Sex Pistols were all marketing, all hype, and only a little music. Why be surprised?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Overcast (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 1:42pm

   
   

   Everyone's a corporate sell-out in the entertainment industry anymore.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re:

   

   Chronno S. Trigger (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 1:51pm

   
   

   If I would have seen it I would have figured it was a pop culture reference like Hard Rock or Planet Hollywood. I would only think that the guy who wrote the menu had a sense of humor. While Pittsburgh's Hard Rock has Michael Jackson's jacket, I don't think that there is any connection between the two. Same thing here.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 2:05pm

   
   

   As the saying goes, "Those who can, innovate. Those who can't, litigate.""

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   Alan Gerow (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 2:14pm

   
   

   Isn't any anti-establishment musician or musical group that signs a record contract with a major record label by definition a "sell out"? They've sold their music to the music industrial complex and no longer are making music for the fans, but are making it for the shareholders.
   
   To ever be truly punk rock, you'd have to first refuse to be a cog in the machine. Once you sign a contract, you get your cog membership card and secret decoder ring; you're no longer punk rock anyway.
   
   The only way to not be a "sell out" and have a record contract is never to have ideals to begin with. Then there's nothing to "sell out" of.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 2:45pm

   
   

   THEM STEALERS ARE DESTROYING THE PUNK ROCK PHILOSOPHY!!!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    Re:

    

    scarr (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 2:46pm

    
    

    Or as Tool put it:
    
    "All you know about me is what I sold you
    Dumb fuck
    I sold out long before you ever even heard my name
    
    I sold my soul to make a record
    Dipshit
    Then you bought one"

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Jake, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 3:08pm

    
    

    Lydon was last heard of lending his dubious acting skills to a margarine commercial, so one can't help but suspect he's not going to be too upset; he probably needs the money.
    
    And I hope every old Pistols fan in the audience feels really bad about all the names they called the Boomtown Rats now.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    Thanks For The Credit

    

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 3:39pm

    
    

    I first heard this story on local TV news. I knew there’d be references to it on the Web, which is why the link I sent you was a Google search. Doesn’t that count as a link? :)

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 3:47pm

    
    

    Punk Rock is dead. Get with the picture. Figured Avril Lavine and Good Charlotte were signs enough of this mockery.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    Matt (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 3:54pm

    
    

    Wait... "my guess is that the Pistols have a decent enough trademark claim here"... really? Did they ever sell ice cream under the Pistol's mark? Or food? According to the linked article, they did not file a TM application in this area until _after_ the "infringing" use appeared. I think you are being too generous, Mike: their trademark claim is, at best, hogwash (and at worst actionable hog wash).
    
    They _may_ have a dilution claim, but it's a bit of a stretch. They have a better copyright claim, premised on the "God Save the Cream" banner which is clearly based off an old Pistol's album cover... unless the banner is a parody (certainly could be understood that way).

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    Real Punks...

    

    GeneralEmergency (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 4:29pm

    
    

    ...Beat up lawyers, not hire them!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    

    Sid's Still Dead but he has more to say than you, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 5:13pm

    
    

    Wow. Who would have thought a band that had reformed for the Filthy Lucre Tour a decade ago would have such avarice?!
    
    Obviously, someone who knows nothing about them and wants to score a cheap rhetorical point against a group of people (punks) he's not a member of and knows not much about. You know, an ignorant bigot.
    
    Rock on, dude.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

17.  

    Re:

    

    Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 20th, 2009 @ 5:25pm

    
    

    Obviously, someone who knows nothing about them and wants to score a cheap rhetorical point against a group of people (punks) he's not a member of and knows not much about. You know, an ignorant bigot.
    
    Ha! This story wasn't about making a point about punks. And, honestly, what does making fun of a silly trademark dispute have to do with being a bigot?
    
    Anyway, anyone who thinks that punk is about membership has some learning to do.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

18.  

    Re:

    

    Luci, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 6:33pm

    
    

    Bullshit. How many people have a sandwich named after them? No one believes that that person endorses the sandwich, it's a mark of honor. They're just full of shit and money grubbing greed.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

19.  

    punks

    

    punk puncher, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 8:43pm

    
    

    are punkers lactose intolerant?
    
    yeah, i think they are.
    
    and allergic to soap and toothpaste.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

20.  

    Punk Still Trendy?

    

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 20th, 2009 @ 9:28pm

    
    

    Someone pointed out, back in the 1990s, that punk was older then than hippie was when punk first started.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

21.  

    Missing the story

    

    mikez (profile), Oct 21st, 2009 @ 7:34am

    
    

    The claim was filed by the holding company and the issue is that the advertising looks too much like the artwork from God Save the Queen. This is not about punk, it's about lawyers and trademarks, fair use, etc.
    
    http://www.nme.com/news/sex-pistols/47841

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

22.  

    Re:

    

    vivaelamor (profile), Oct 21st, 2009 @ 2:09pm

    
    

    "Obviously, someone who knows nothing about them and wants to score a cheap rhetorical point against a group of people (punks) he's not a member of and knows not much about. You know, an ignorant bigot."
    
    You think punks are a group? My membership card must be in the mail. Else-wise, maybe punk music is about expressing yourself rather than being part of a group.
    
    I'm guessing if you met me you'd call me a hippy for having long hair because you sure sound like more of a ignorant bigot than Mike does.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

23.  

    Re:

    

    vivaelamor (profile), Oct 21st, 2009 @ 2:18pm

    
    

    If you like traditional punk music (is there such a thing?) you should give The Strap Ons a listen to. You can find them on magnatune.com.
    
    Personally I'm glad NOFX and Bad Religion are still going though I miss a lot of the older bands (especially X-Ray Spex and Siouxse and the Banshees).

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

24.  

    Re:

    

    vivaelamor (profile), Oct 21st, 2009 @ 3:44pm

    
    

    Or you can do what Atari Teenage Riot did and pick up a big cheque from a major label then use it to set up your own label while never actually releasing anything on the big label.
    
    The less crafty might want to just look for a non RIAA label to start out on before setting up their own when they make some money. Like Fat Mike of NOFX did.
    
    Personally, and as I keep saying, I'm rather fond of the magnatune.com way of doing things.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

25.  

    At least Sex Pistols are in the right...

    

    Anonymous Coward, Oct 22nd, 2009 @ 7:26am

    
    

    It's nice to see trademark law *not* being abused, since it's actually good, reasonable law (when you stick to the law, and don't try to overreach).
    
    I completely thought that this was endorsed by the Sex Pistols. It took me until nearly the end of the article to figure out exactly why they were suing, because I figured there was *no way* a company would flat out use a popular band's trademarked name in the name of their product like that without permission. It's just so *stupid*.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment