Ed sued for trademark infringement Options

[FishOutaWater]

BREAKING NEWS. Ed was just sued for trademark infringement for using the name Live. A link to a story is in my twitter account. I am typing this from my phone and can't link it.

[PurdueSteve]

This has been an entertaining read. Just when I thought the EK couldn't disappoint me anymore, all of this happens.

If Ed wants to be connected to Live so much, and wants his sets to be mostly Live songs, why the fuck didn't he just stay in Live? The only reason it could be is that he wanted to ride the coat-tails of Live's success (which includes his work and the work of others) but be the sole beneficiary. He wants to have his cake and eat it to. Anyone arguing or making excuses about how Ed should have access to the Live brand because he was a big part of Live needs to understand that Ed consciously volunteered to leave the band to pursue a solo career and that the other 3 members of Live, who want to continue the band, have a new singer. Ed gave Live up. Ed left Live. Ed should have no claim and most certainly shouldn't need a Live crutch to sustain his solo career. Depending on Live, milking the brand, asking venues and promoters to identify him as "Live's Ed Kowalczyk" is saying, without a doubt, that he is only interested in the success of Live with the 3 other band members removed from the equation.

Also, I posted before how Ed probably wouldn't (or shouldn't) have to pay damages for the time period duration of the hiatus, because at the time Live hadn't announced that they had "broken up". In some of the links in this thread someone linked to Ed's response to the first suit and Ed's response clearly identified that he left the band in 2009. In that case, Ed knew and even admitted that he was no longer in the band Live and as such billing, marketing and promoting his self as such, without authorization and when untrue, is just a flat out lie.