[REMOVE ADS]




Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 73 of 73
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,312
    Rep Power
    530
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    Wilson's suit claimed the groups were misleading members of the public into believing they were the authentic Supremes.

    I know that at least on several budget CD releases, the FLOS were referred to as THE SUPREMES. Several of us undoubtedly have them in our collections. So I'm sure it was confusing, if even deceiving, to think you're going to get The Supremes "Baby Love" with a Diana vocal on a Funk Brothers track, and instead get Cindy Scott a la karaoke. Perhaps Mary was just looking out for the fans?
    I bought quite a few of those cds but I knew what I was getting, even when at least one had photos of DMF or JMC on the cover. But I could see less-knowledgable fans being confused.

    That said, I thought part of the problem Mary had with the Flos was that they became competitors on the European touring market. If I was a promoter and I had just brought in the Flos, I don't know if I would be so eager to bring in Mary unless a certain amount of time had passed. Also, I wonder if the Flos had a cheaper rate than Mary?

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,896
    Rep Power
    397
    In the scheme of things, I wonder how much business Mary actually "lost" with these "competitors"? It appears the SOS were only getting a few gigs a year at best, and the FLOS perhaps just a few more. Without a doubt, Mary was booked and blessed up until her death.

    I will say, the FLOS do appear to be making more appearances as of late.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,312
    Rep Power
    530
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    In the scheme of things, I wonder how much business Mary actually "lost" with these "competitors"? It appears the SOS were only getting a few gigs a year at best, and the FLOS perhaps just a few more. Without a doubt, Mary was booked and blessed up until her death.

    I will say, the FLOS do appear to be making more appearances as of late.
    I was pleasantly surprised a few years ago when Scherrie, Susaye, and Joyce made a local appearance here in Massachusetts. I don't remember the Flos ever appearing here before that. Unfortunately, I already had tickets to another concert that same evening so I had to miss them.

    Mary, on the other hand, was a fairly frequent visitor to the area and I was able to see her a few times.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    21,890
    Rep Power
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    In the scheme of things, I wonder how much business Mary actually "lost" with these "competitors"? It appears the SOS were only getting a few gigs a year at best, and the FLOS perhaps just a few more. Without a doubt, Mary was booked and blessed up until her death.

    I will say, the FLOS do appear to be making more appearances as of late.
    In the reading that you’ve all encouraged with these links, there was at least one references to “thousands” of appearances and I think that reference may have been to SOS.

    If Mary Scherrie and Lynda were motivated enough to fight a case that resulted in an 18 page judgement and probably cost them collectively $100,000 in legal fees with some costs ordered against Mary, it’s safe to say they felt something was at stake here.

    I recently saw that Diana rakes in about $10 million dollars a year these days. While none of the rest of them were doing that, they were and some still are”making a decent living”.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,235
    Rep Power
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by carlo View Post
    Thanks Bayou. I agree.

    I was browsing some older posts and found this link that Jobeterob had shared back in 2014. It is not related to this lawsuit that Mary had filed, but rather a trademark filing in the UK, for the Supremes name, which resulted in a dispute between Mary and the FLOS. It describes the nature of Mary's contract with Motown in 1974, which had stated did not have the right to the Supremes name, outside of her recording contract, which Bradsupremes had pointed out earlier. It's interesting that the document states that no evidence could be found of Lynda having signed a contract with Mary's Supremes Inc., but was under contract as a Motown artist. It says that Scherrie had indeed signed a contract, as an employee of Supremes Inc., and the contact stated she could not use the Supremes name in the future, but this contract had no effect under UK law [likely because Mary was not the trademark owner].

    I also found this excerpt to also be interesting:

    [Mary] was aware that the opponents [Scherrie Payne and Lynda Laurence] had commenced performing again under the name. This awareness must have existed at least from 1987 because she says in paragraph 24 of her first declaration that she ..... "performed with the opponents at The Wiltshire Ebell in 1987. I attended the show because I was aggrieved at the opponents use of the name THE SUPREMES. The opponents invited me on stage and due to the attendance of many of my fans in
    the audience I did go up on stage because if I had refused in front of my fans it
    would have seemed churlish, but this was not to be seen as an endorsement of
    the opponents activities."


    I remember seeing a clip of this on Youtube.

    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/o15801.pdf
    I suspect she was only "aggreived" after the fact and likely only when this came up in deposition and she had to claim grievance as her appearance at the show and getting on stage to perform with them was going to be used against her. I could be wrong, but perhaps in 1987 when that show occurrred Mary had no problems with The FLOS given that Dreamgirl the book was riding high on best seller list and she was envisioning a big comeback thus there was room for the FLOs on the lower level oldies circuit gigs that Mary regarded as not in her league given her best selling author status as well as being an original Supreme. But she didn't make a big comeback as a singer/performer and found herself competing with The FLOS and later SOS for gigs.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,235
    Rep Power
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    Wilson's suit claimed the groups were misleading members of the public into believing they were the authentic Supremes.

    I know that at least on several budget CD releases, the FLOS were referred to as THE SUPREMES. Several of us undoubtedly have them in our collections. So I'm sure it was confusing, if even deceiving, to think you're going to get The Supremes "Baby Love" with a Diana vocal on a Funk Brothers track, and instead get Cindy Scott a la karaoke. Perhaps Mary was just looking out for the fans?
    Did Mary sue the FLOS over those CDs? If so, once again terrible legal advise. She didn't have a right to the Supremes name and the one to have sued even if she did have the rights would be the record company that issued those FLOS CDs as Surpemes CDs. And if she did sue, Mary was looking after Mary primarily, not the fans, as those Cds could have impacted sales of legit Supremes CDs in which Mary earned royalties on and/or turn off customers when they actually heard those CDs and feel they have been ripped off when they weren't getting the Motown sound and the orginal Diana or Jean lead vocals and thus make them weary of buying a legit Supremes Motown CD collection and thus cutting into Mary's royalties. Not to say Mary didn't care about the fans, but Mary was about looking after Mary even if she made some dumb choices in conducting her business.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    21,890
    Rep Power
    481
    I don’t believe there was any legal action over the cds.

    It was an action by Mary Wilson to register a trademark - the name Supremes. And it was in England.

    It was opposed by Scherrie and Lynda.

    And Scherrie and Lynda were successful for the most part.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,128
    Rep Power
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by reese View Post
    I bought quite a few of those cds but I knew what I was getting, even when at least one had photos of DMF or JMC on the cover. But I could see less-knowledgable fans being confused.

    That said, I thought part of the problem Mary had with the Flos was that they became competitors on the European touring market. If I was a promoter and I had just brought in the Flos, I don't know if I would be so eager to bring in Mary unless a certain amount of time had passed. Also, I wonder if the Flos had a cheaper rate than Mary?
    I believe that was the real problem, [[undercutting her European bookings).

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,896
    Rep Power
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Spreadinglove21 View Post
    Did Mary sue the FLOS over those CDs? If so, once again terrible legal advise. She didn't have a right to the Supremes name and the one to have sued even if she did have the rights would be the record company that issued those FLOS CDs as Surpemes CDs. And if she did sue, Mary was looking after Mary primarily, not the fans, as those Cds could have impacted sales of legit Supremes CDs in which Mary earned royalties on and/or turn off customers when they actually heard those CDs and feel they have been ripped off when they weren't getting the Motown sound and the orginal Diana or Jean lead vocals and thus make them weary of buying a legit Supremes Motown CD collection and thus cutting into Mary's royalties. Not to say Mary didn't care about the fans, but Mary was about looking after Mary even if she made some dumb choices in conducting her business.
    She did not. I was just suggesting, to Mary's point, that the groups were misleading.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,896
    Rep Power
    397
    Interestingly enough, Mary and Scherrie appeared to have remained friendly, regardless of lawsuit or not. So it clearly was business, not personal. Either way, Mary is gone, and The FLOS keep the music playing.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    939
    Rep Power
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I have to add this about Mary though, her opposition to the FLOS was dead wrong. I get the rationalization that the FLOS could get bookings that Mary should have gotten and thus became competition of the highest order for Mary. But just like Mary had bills to pay and mouths to feed, so did the Former Ladies, all of whom had a right to cash in on their time as Supremes. And considering that Mary would not end the group and go out on her own until much later, those ladies helped her keep the group going and you'd think she'd at least have enough respect for them to give them her blessing.

    None of the replacements had the name value of Mary Wilson, especially after Dreamgirl exploded- which I think was also around the time the FLOS were formed- so I would think she'd probably get the better bookings on average anyway. Why begrudge the other ladies?
    I think what irked Mary was they were able to call themselves the Supremes in certain territories overseas...the first grouping of the FLO'S were great....despite my deep love for Scherrie as a performer, once Jean Terrell left the FLO'S it was over for me....I did like Freddi Pooles voice...but I'll pass on both the Sundray period and current line up....

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    939
    Rep Power
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    But was SHE using Mary Wilson and the Supremes, or were promoters using it? That's what I'd like to know. Clearly there was recognition value in using "the Supremes" attached with the name Mary Wilson, but I'd think Mary always used OF instead of AND.
    The contracts she signed with promoters had to be legally correctly labeled to protect her from lawsuits....she was not responsible for the way concert promoters and club owners advertised the show....the only exception was probably the South American concerts the Supremes as a continuing unit couldn't fill, and were agreed thru Supremes Inc while the group still existed....

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    824
    Rep Power
    273
    Mary was best friends with Scherrie's sister Freda and she wrote that of all the Supremes that Scherrie was the one she would have wanted to carry on with in terms of talent and personality. So, they remained friendly despite the FLOS and RTL. Mary understood it was business and not personal with Scherrie. Mary wrote that she went to see the FLOs just to see what they were doing and went onstage even though she didn't want to because had she refused she would have disappointed fans. Mary even went onstage with Jean for a solo concert for a few minutes.
    I think Mary remained cordial with Jean, Lynda and Susaye and more friendly with Scherrie and Cindy. Before she passed Lynda saw Mary perform in Vegas. Mary also invited them all to the Grammy Museum for a Supremes exhibition. Whether she did these things because of friendship or business remains to be seen.
    I think Mary might have been nonplussed that Jean and Lynda were using the Supremes name when both left her high and dry in 1973, especially because they wanted to leave Motown and change the name to something else and here they were using the name a decade later.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,235
    Rep Power
    158
    Anyone else think that the acronym for the Former Ladies of the Supremes [[FLOS) is tacky and in bad taste?

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,728
    Rep Power
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by gman View Post
    The contracts she signed with promoters had to be legally correctly labeled to protect her from lawsuits....she was not responsible for the way concert promoters and club owners advertised the show....the only exception was probably the South American concerts the Supremes as a continuing unit couldn't fill, and were agreed thru Supremes Inc while the group still existed....
    I used to blame Mary for some of those controversial billings, but it does make sense that she wouldn't be responsible for the way a venue or a promotor billed her. That photo of Mary, Gloria and Karen Jackson that Carlo posted could be problematic for the case of Mary's innocence. But we would have to verify that she had anything to do with that too.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,728
    Rep Power
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by Spreadinglove21 View Post
    Anyone else think that the acronym for the Former Ladies of the Supremes [[FLOS) is tacky and in bad taste?
    I don't think so. One could argue that it's an unintended honor for the somewhat mythical "founder" of the group.

    Personally I think it might have been better if the ladies had just gone by The Supremes when all the members were actual former members. By the late 80s, the group as a relevant or potentially relevant group was long gone, so why not?

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,728
    Rep Power
    552
    I don't think any of this would have been an issue for Mary had she been able to really catapult her music career in the wake of Dreamgirl, which, again, I place the blame on her shoulders.

    Recently I re-watched the episode of 227 that Mary appeared on. It's still one of my favorite episodes [[Pearl going on about that peach still cracks me up, even when it just runs across my mind). The whole "Ooo Boppa Doo Boppa My Boy" thing was cute, but that was not the way to introduce [[or re-introduce) Mary Wilson, singer, to a national audience. She sounded great, she looked great. That's not the issue. She's singing "ooo boppa doo boppa". No, just no. Even if she did do that, it would have been nice if there was a point in the show where the judge says something like "Ms. Wilson, will you do us the honor of another song" or something like that, where Mary could show what she was capable of.

    Why didn't Mary ever do any showcases, where she invited music execs out to see a set she's put together in the hopes of peaking their interest? These are the types of things you do when you want to get things going, and the time after Dreamgirl exploded was the time to do it. Mary squandered a lot of opportunities, and thus she was forced to view the FLOS and SOS as competition, which should never have been the case.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,896
    Rep Power
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Spreadinglove21 View Post
    Did Mary sue the FLOS over those CDs? If so, once again terrible legal advise. She didn't have a right to the Supremes name and the one to have sued even if she did have the rights would be the record company that issued those FLOS CDs as Surpemes CDs. And if she did sue, Mary was looking after Mary primarily, not the fans, as those Cds could have impacted sales of legit Supremes CDs in which Mary earned royalties on and/or turn off customers when they actually heard those CDs and feel they have been ripped off when they weren't getting the Motown sound and the orginal Diana or Jean lead vocals and thus make them weary of buying a legit Supremes Motown CD collection and thus cutting into Mary's royalties. Not to say Mary didn't care about the fans, but Mary was about looking after Mary even if she made some dumb choices in conducting her business.
    "The obsession or fixation amongst some of you with who's getting royalties and how much income they made/make is intrusively tacky, unseemly and really none of your business."

    Lol.

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    1,235
    Rep Power
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by marybrewster View Post
    "The obsession or fixation amongst some of you with who's getting royalties and how much income they made/make is intrusively tacky, unseemly and really none of your business."

    Lol.
    Struck a nerve didn't I?

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,896
    Rep Power
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Spreadinglove21 View Post
    Struck a nerve didn't I?
    Calling out your hypocrisy.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,139
    Rep Power
    261
    Well guys, just the other day I pulled out the Mary Wilson Anthology and listened again to the glorious remixes of Touch, Floy, Automatically and some others. I didn't spend any time worrying about the legalities of a name, I just basked in the great music.

    Mary is at peace now and I am sure no longer worried about all these details. She belongs to the ages. I just wish the rest of us could just enjoy her work and let her rest. Flo as well.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    6,354
    Rep Power
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by BayouMotownMan View Post
    Well guys, just the other day I pulled out the Mary Wilson Anthology and listened again to the glorious remixes of Touch, Floy, Automatically and some others. I didn't spend any time worrying about the legalities of a name, I just basked in the great music.

    Mary is at peace now and I am sure no longer worried about all these details. She belongs to the ages. I just wish the rest of us could just enjoy her work and let her rest. Flo as well.
    Very well said. I believe Miss Mary Wilson is in heaven and BTW..........Automatically Sunshine from the Mary Wilson double CD is my fav song on the entire album.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    824
    Rep Power
    273
    The Mary Wilson Anthology is simply beautiful. Automatically Sunshine is a real standout. Miss Wilson's vocals are wonderful. Truly underrated and in my opinion her voice is underappreciated. It is so warm and beautiful.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

[REMOVE ADS]

Ralph Terrana
MODERATOR

Welcome to Soulful Detroit! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
Soulful Detroit is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to Soulful Detroit. [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.