Legal issues with the use of the name Jethro Tull

[Deleted]

The heirs of the classic Jethro Tull, now called Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson by legal problems with Martin Barre, are one of the most attractive projects to the classics. Now we bring a recent statement from Anderson, living myth of British prog and folk.


www.portalesquizofrenia.com/ian-anderson-dice-que-ya-no-es-un-fan-de-la-musica-rock/2013/03/?fb_action_ids=4351706519561&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582


found this while browsing the web...

[TM]

Thanks Charlie, although they do not expand on the mention of the legal issues.

I'm aware that Ian has taken legal action in order to procure the rights to Jethro Tull, but it now sounds as if Martin has done the same to protect his interests in the band.

I don't see anything wrong with this. Especially since Ian has gone on record several times saying "no Martin, no Tull."

Maybe Jeff could chime in on the legality of this? Does Ian comments give Martin legal "rights" to the band and the use of it's name?

[Deleted]

my take is that "both" may have some legal rights to the name, and until one gives it up it is in limbo

just my take on it..
that is why it has to be called Ian Anderson plays Jethro Tull...or Martin Barre plays the music of Jethro Tull

Maybe when the pastures where happier for both of them they put something in writing giving each some sort of legal claim to the name..around 1993ish..

just a thought

[marcnstein]

Mar 24, 2013 10:57:04 GMT -5 TM said:

Thanks Charlie, although they do not expand on the mention of the legal issues.

I'm aware that Ian has taken legal action in order to procure the rights to Jethro Tull, but it now sounds as if Martin has done the same to protect his interests in the band.

I don't see anything wrong with this. Especially since Ian has gone on record several times saying "no Martin, no Tull."

Maybe Jeff could chime in on the legality of this? Does Ian comments give Martin legal "rights" to the band and the use of it's name?

Not sure that what one says in a program for a rock show trumps trademarks and other legal realities.

In the past Ian has made it clear he owns the name Jethro Tull. I don't see him getting hung up on Martin using it, the comment could relate to recognition, most people not on this board think Ian is Jethro, and could hardly name any other member, past or up to 2011 (or present).

Looking after the name is important, if you remember the Guess Who, an old drummer I think it was grabbed the name, and Bachman and Cummings now can't tour with the name of their band. Maybe Ian is looking to avoid that.

[TM]

While there are several of us who speak openly in support of Martin, we all agree that Jethro Tull has always been and will always be Ian's band.

I simply prefer to remember pre-Roger Waters' times when Ian thought of Tull as a band and appreciated the contributions of it's members a bit more.

[Deleted]

that is not in doubt...
it has always been Ian's baby

[marcnstein]

Mar 24, 2013 12:24:29 GMT -5 TM said:

While there are several of us who speak openly in support of Martin, we all agree that Jethro Tull has always been and will always be Ian's band.

I simply prefer to remember pre-Roger Waters' times when Ian thought of Tull as a band and appreciated the contributions of it's members a bit more.

I think he fully appreciates the contribution of the current band. Probably no less and no more than he appreciated the contribution of members of the previous bands, Tull, Anderson Band, etc.

[Deleted]

I think Paul's reference is to the fact that what Ian regarded in several interviews over the years as a 'group' album with contributions from all members back in 71/72, has now transformed into an entirely solo production some 40 years later.