Marvelettes get their name back!

[stingbeelee]

This was posted by smark 21 in the Soulful Detroit forum but I think it needs to be put in the Motown Forum. Larry Marshak sued the Marvelettes for continued use of the name "Marvelettes" and he has been denied use of the name. The name Marvelettes is now [[and has been) owned by Motown and/or the Marvelettes [[Kat Schaffner and the estate of Gladys Horton). If this case holds, then it has been a banner year for the Marvelous Marvelettes!

http://fwrv.com/articles/100899--com...ttes-name.html

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal...pdf?1336833390

Also, Jobeterob has posted an article in a law journal about the case under Soulful Detroit forum as "Who owns and controls the name of a musical group"

[nosey]

Unfortunately, too late for Gladys. I would have loved to have seen her group of Marvelettes as I loved her voice moreso than Wanda's.

[R. Mark Desjardins]

Sometimes justice takes its own sweet time to make wrongs right. This serves as a perfect example of not rolling over and becoming defeated.

[luke]

Fascinating article though though I dont know that it changes anything. Can Marshak still use name Marvellettes[[double l)? Assuming not it is still not decided who owns the name-Motown or Katherine et al. However it does continue a precedent of the original members who receive royalties as being in possession of the name apparently-though not always-Vito and Salutations...This would seem to bode well for people like Mary Wilson etc who have fought for name rights. Lawyers input welcomed!

[midnightman]

Anyone who was not a group member of the Marvelettes should NOT get paid for royalties as an alleged Marvelettes member especially if said members were not even born when the original Marvelettes reigned house. Katherine talked about her and Gladys's estate finally getting back the name of the group in their names shortly after Gladys' death.

[jobeterob]

The royalties from Marvelettes recordings are probably insignificant. And Universal probably resists paying any royalties on "digital" sales.

But there is lots of money to be made from touring using that name. Last year on Ticketmaster, The Marvelettes [[whoever they were) were touring more than any former Motown act, including Diana Ross, Lionel Ritchie and Stevie Wonder.

No modern day Marvelette is going to get any royalties; royalties, such as they are, would be paid to the people and estates that were contracted to Motown in the 60's.

The point of one of the articles was that agreements are necessary long before the name is worth anything. You avoid all the fighting that has occurred over names like Temptations, Supremes, Marvelettes, Beach Boys etc.

After all was said and done over the name Supremes, Motown ended up with it [[now Universal) and pretty much, they don't care who uses it; why would they? Any use of it sells a few CDS. And the FLOS apparently trademarked it and own it in England.

[luke]

The last part of the article states that it has NOT been decided who owns the name the Marvelettes. It said-in so many words- there is now precedence for artists who have been collecting royalites as being kind of creative forces to perpetuate the group name and thus could be considered the owners of said name. I doubt the fake MarveLLettes make much money on tour--they are typically part of packages. But I believe Marshak has his hands in a lot of things-so they do contribute to his overall pot. I believe the article -the one about the specific court ruling urges artists to make agreements to avoid this kind of thing. It stated that Kat and Georgia I believe thought up the name Marvels and Berry the ettes![[Flo picked the name Supremes from a list given her by Janie Bradford. A similar case could have thus certainly been made for the name Supremes.) Why Im not sure but Motown has made it clear it DOES care who uses the name in the USA. The FLos dont and Mary doesnt--not allowed to.

[jobeterob]

The 2012 Marvelettes were running in Las Vegas for a long time this year; I'm sure they were paid as little as possible but the owner of the group and name made a lot more.

The are several Supremes groups running around the USA and Universal Motown doesn't do anything about it; they just let them carry on.

[roger]

After all was said and done over the name Supremes, Motown ended up with it [[now Universal) and pretty much, they don't care who uses it; why would they? Any use of it sells a few CDS. And the FLOS apparently trademarked it and own it in England.

I'm not sure about that Jobeterob .. I think the FLOs are allowed to incorporate the name "SUPREMES" in the name of the stage-act but not use it in isolation.

When they appeared in Britain two years back as part of the "Divas of Motown" tour they were billed as "Ladies Formerly of The Supremes".

http://www.last.fm/event/1129338+Divas+of+Motown

Good news if THE MARVELETTES have got their name back, if it stops the imposters pretending that they are anything more than "Tribute" acts, but a little late I would say.

Roger

[jobeterob]

In their twilight years, maybe they all reached an "accommodation" with the owners of the name ~ an accommodation basically being the "agreement" that would have saved a lot of heartache had it been in place at the beginning.

[luke]

Dont the FLos bill themselves as Scherrie and Lynda formerly of the Supremes? I believe they offically changed it to that awhile ago-I imagine as the #3 slot was not a Supreme. I wish the Marvelettes owned the name but Marhak doesnt at least.

[jobeterob]

It seems to me that the effects of aging and the financial and mental cost of those that participate in the fighting often by the age of 65 or 70 causes an "agreement" of sorts to be made and that agreement allows most of the people that had some legitmate connection to the name to use at least a variation of the name ~ and this seems to be what has happened with the Supremes, Temptations, Beach Boys and perhaps it is where the name Marvelettes is going.

Also, by the time original group members reach 70, it is probably a fact that the name isn't quite so valuable anymore because people of that age aren't going to be going on any 2 year long tours or even 6 month tours.