Ed sued for trademark infringement Options

[FishOutaWater]

How about proving that Ed using the LIVE name caused CCP any financial damages? Since CCP did not tour at all as LIVE the last 3 years since the split, it will be extremely hard to prove.

You don't know anything. Action Front doesn't have to prove that Action Front suffered damages. They just have to prove that Ed had financial gain off of the use of its intellectual property, and disgorge him of that profit. Also, in terms of damages, they appear to be claiming dilution of the trademark (i.e. because Ed continued to claim he is "of Live" the real Live with Chris Shinn may have suffered).

By the way, the Hollywood Reporter picked up this story. This may end up being a good way to spread the word among the mainstream media that Chris Shinn is in and Ed is out. It may not have been news, but their is nothing like a juicy Federal lawsuit in the entertainment industry to stir up attention.

This post has been edited by FishOutaWater: Jul 17 2012, 10:30 pm

[SJN1279]

Live announced their lead singer in March and played 2 shows as Live. Both rehearsals, one as a guest. LIVE, get it. Ed continued to use and tell venues Ed of Live. We told you 1000000 times that of Live indicates past tense. Even though Live was officially on a hiatus and were doing TGF, Ed announced solo tours, said he was solo, doing new music, but his concerts were 70% Live tunes and used the LIVE logo in all of his marquees. It was his public movement to the venues doing this after all. Venues which probably didn't know were confused based on what is written in that article I linked.



You told many of us that CC&P were deceiving the public, when it's actually Ed who is doing it. The facts don't lie, but you didn't learn morals, truth and ethics in your house growing up.

2 shows, both free. Both full. Again what damages? Ed is allowed to perform LIVE tunes, Chad Taylor said so himself.

Everything else you said was speculation. Let the courts decide. Enjoy the music or lack thereof.

[OutToDry]

Says you.

The most likely outcome is a change of billing, but 2 million dollars in damages?! CCP are the kings of filing ridiculous lawsuits.

Really? I'd say they're pretty serious. But you turn your head to such matters. It's all like a wrestling script to you eh?

You sound like someone who's scared of something.

This post has been edited by OutToDry: Jul 17 2012, 10:28 pm

[SJN1279]

You don't know anything. Action Front doesn't have to prove that Action Front suffered damages. They just have to prove that Ed had financial gain off of the use of its intellectual property, and disgorge him of that profit.

By the way, the Hollywood Reporter picked up this story. This may end up being a good way to spread the word among the mainstream media that Chris Shinn is in and Ed is out. It may not have been news, but their is nothing like a juicy Federal lawsuit in the entertainment industry to stir up attention.

Again let the courts decide. Chris Shinn and new LIVE......mainstream media doesn't give a shit.

[themaestro]

Says you.

The most likely outcome is a change of billing, but 2 million dollars in damages?! CCP are the kings of filing ridiculous lawsuits.

No, says trademark law. Pretty straightforward, he either had a legal right to use Live or not. It's not ridiculous at all when he has been doing this for 3 years.

This post has been edited by themaestro: Jul 17 2012, 10:32 pm

[FishOutaWater]

Again let the courts decide. Chris Shinn and new LIVE......mainstream media doesn't give a shit.

You're in over your head.

[SJN1279]

Really? I'd say they're pretty serious. But you turn your head to such matters. It's all like a wrestling script to you eh?

You sound like someone who's scared of something.

They can be serious all they want. It must be easier filing ridiculous lawsuits than trying to get new bands off the ground.

[OutToDry]

2 shows, both free. Both full. Again what damages? Ed is allowed to perform LIVE tunes, Chad Taylor said so himself.

Everything else you said was speculation. Let the courts decide. Enjoy the music or lack thereof.

I never said he can't play. I told you this today in the Wolfs thread. Yes he can, he can collect royalties forever, even new Live rerecords. Are you missing the reason for the suit?



Go read the article I linked. Speculation bullshit, I know, because I know!!

[SJN1279]

No, says trademark law. Pretty straightforward, he either had a legal right to use Live or not. It's not frivolous at all when he has been doing this for 3 years.

If it was a problem, why did they wait 3 years to file? Looks like another half assed money grab.

[OutToDry]

If it was a problem, why did they wait 3 years to file? Looks like another half assed money grab.

Ask Ed, You know money grabs well sir!!

[SJN1279]

I never said he can't play. I told you this today in the Wolfs thread. Yes he can, he can collect royalties forever, even new Live rerecords. Are you missing the reason for the suit?



Go read the article I linked. Speculation bullshit, I know, because I know!!

New LIVE rerecords.....yeah there is big money in that....lol.

[SinfulEyes]

They can be serious all they want. It must be easier filing ridiculous lawsuits than trying to get new bands off the ground.

You really take this Ed stuff personally. Why is that, Nick?

[OutToDry]

Nick, youre in way over your head, why are you defending Ed when it appears he's the one in the wrong on all turns since 2005. Stop.

Maybe Ed will cancel his tours and re-assess his future!

[themaestro]

If it was a problem, why did they wait 3 years to file? Looks like another half assed money grab.

Just doing their due diligence, something which Ed apparently has no concept of.

[OutToDry]

New LIVE rerecords.....yeah there is big money in that....lol.

New Album too dickhead. You are a dickhead, and a shithead too