mercuryrocks 27.06.2005 09:21 |
call themselves Queen??? I mean, it was Freddie who invented the name AND half of the band is missing right now. Freddie and John are not there so how are they ALLOWED to call themselves Queen? Brian and Roger are NOT Queen. They are members of the late band Queen which consisted of Brian, Roger, John and Freddie. I mean, that is not a matter of opinion...That is a FACT! Just wondering.... |
Fenderek 27.06.2005 09:26 |
Don't get me wrong but we had that like a thousand(s) times already... |
mercuryrocks 27.06.2005 09:28 |
Well, I haven't been here that long... Could you tell me then? Are they allowed to do call themselves that? |
Fenderek 27.06.2005 09:35 |
Legal point of you- yes Any other- up to you Fred's dead. John supports (apparently) whatever they do just doesn't want to be involved- retired. I guess by elimintaion they're Queen... Who cares anyway- they rocked big time on last tour... Couldn't care less if they're called Queen or Yabadabadi. Everybody knows Mercury's dead- it's not misleading than... |
Serry... 27.06.2005 10:07 |
No, they aren't, IMO. We've been discussed about that in the late of 2004 in topic ''Do they have to ask John's permission for using Queen name?'' (which was started by someone called Serry Funster in those days). But as Fenderek wrote - who cares? Roger and Brian still rocks - that's a fact too. |
Zephyr 27.06.2005 10:53 |
Queen is Freddie, Roger, Brian and John. But...on the other hand...way back to 13. April in Vienna, do you know how many happinies shared Brian and Roger to all those people including me staying in the crowd? I never had the chance to see Freddie on stage, but now, I was a step closer to him, because I saw Queen there. There were Roger and Brian but Freddie and John too. Someone thinks they were only on the screen, but I think they were in our hearts and minds. And that is importent. No wether Roger and Brian are allowed to using that magic name. Queen still rocks. Now with 2 members on stage, but with four in our hearts. |
mercuryrocks 27.06.2005 11:25 |
I absolutely agree that Roger and Brian rocks and Queen consists of four in our hearts and everything... But I'm thinking of the legal side of it! |
john bodega 27.06.2005 11:27 |
Jesus get over it. You people make a very valid point - Queen RIP 1991, etcetera... so that's what, fourteen years you've been telling other people to stop playing music because it doesn't fit your narrow view? Go to buggery, if they want to, they will. In fifty years, what Brian and Roger do has a chance of being remembered and written about. In fifty years, no one will give a stuff that a bunch of assholes were saying RIP 1991 Queen when a couple of the guys were still playing to 1000's of people and giving 'em a good time. |
GreatKingSam 27.06.2005 11:29 |
The difference is they're not making no secret of the incompleteness of the band. It is clear to ALL that they know that they are only half of Queen. Bri and Roger are each 25% of Queen, and have exactly the same rights as the other 50%, dead or alive. As someone said a while back in the middle of that 20-odd page topic started by knob-head BPP "if you cut an apple pie into four slices and take two slices away, does it mean it is not an apple pie?". No. Just half. |
kohuept 27.06.2005 11:39 |
GreatKingSam wrote: The difference is they're not making no secret of the incompleteness of the band. It is clear to ALL that they know that they are only half of Queen. Bri and Roger are each 25% of Queen, and have exactly the same rights as the other 50%, dead or alive. As someone said a while back in the middle of that 20-odd page topic started by knob-head BPP "if you cut an apple pie into four slices and take two slices away, does it mean it is not an apple pie?". No. Just half.Wow! Thanks for remembering that! To take it a step further (since it is apparently still not clear), it could almost be seen as wrong to NOT call it Queen. It's Brian and Roger's decision anyway. |
Fenderek 27.06.2005 11:57 |
If you're talking about LEGAL point of view the answer is YES. Who's going to sue them? Freddie? His mom? She's apparently supporting what they do... John? Not really- he let them do whatever the hell they want as long as he's not in the potlight... So of course they have the right to use the name- no-one else is claiming it. Apart from BPP but he's a nutcase... |
Lord Blackadder 27.06.2005 13:53 |
mercuryrocks wrote: Well, I haven't been here that long... Could you tell me then? Are they allowed to do call themselves that?Well if you want to REALLY look into it, Brian and Roger where the first to members. So piss off. |
inu-liger 27.06.2005 14:11 |
If I may make a point, John Deacon wasn't Queen's first or only bass player, as there were a few before him, so he wasn't even a founding member of Queen. So there you go! |
mercuryrocks 27.06.2005 16:06 |
Well, PLEASE do NOT tell me to piss off! I am just asking a question here! There is absolutely no need to talk to me like that. |
siljeoen 27.06.2005 16:43 |
Well of course they can!! They can do whatever they want and get away with it...Like that britney/pink-stuff and that big ugly whore robbie...We hated it,but we forgive them cause we love them! So why should we get angry when they're actually doing something great?? The tour was and still is a once-in-a-lifetime chance for fans under the age of 30 to see them live... |
The King Of Rhye 27.06.2005 17:07 |
the_hero wrote:3 bass players before him, I thought....Mike Grose, Barry Mitchell, and Doug something-or-otherInu-Liger<h6>-a.k.a. Richard Guilbault- wrote: If I may make a point, John Deacon wasn't Queen's first or only bass player, as there were a few before him, so he wasn't even a founding member of Queen. So there you go!there were 6 bass players before him |
mrjordy 27.06.2005 17:08 |
Brian and Roger legally have every right to tour as Queen. I've gone into detail as to why in similar threads and don't care to repeat it again. But, yes, mercuryrocks, Queen is now Brian May and Roger Taylor, plus a few other boys (including Spike Edney), plus Paul Rodgers. As mentioned above, John Deacon seems to support the decision, from all that I've read, but has no intention of joining up. So, the gang's all in agreement - except Freddie, for obivous reasons, so touring under the Queen banner is a-ok. |
mrjordy 27.06.2005 17:12 |
Just thought I'd throw this in - to anyone who thinks Brian and Roger has disgraced the Queen name (which I don't, I'm very excited over the new tour) - just look at what INXS has done. They've turned the death of their lead singer into a new outlet to regain popularity: reality TV. In the style of American Idol, INXS is weeding out the best to sing for their band, all on a brand new reality TV show. Let us just be thankful that OUR favorite band has a tid bit more tact. |
englishyob 27.06.2005 17:28 |
Brian and Roger have not disgraced the Queen name in anyway at all, the QPR tour is just another chapter in what is already a long and amazing history of Queen and the sooner people start to realise this BPP the better |
Insomni@ 27.06.2005 18:24 |
My dear let me clear you something.They have NEVER announced that Queen is ''gone'' as a band,so technically they're still Queen whether we like it or not.So,it's absolutely legal.(By the way,excuse me for my terrible english) |
Sharon G. 27.06.2005 19:55 |
Does any one care what I think? |
inu-liger 27.06.2005 20:26 |
Just to add to my previous post as an after-thought: If John Deacon wasn't even Queen's first bass player, then what the hell is the fuss all about? Geez, if you want the original Queen (minus Freddie of course), have them track down their first-ever bass player, and have HIM join them on their next tour in the USA and *THEN* you have Queen there! (Note that I'm not being entirely serious with what I'm saying, but I thought it would bring up something interesting of a point) |
BriChick 27.06.2005 21:31 |
Know what? Whether you like it or not, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. |
Grantcdn 27.06.2005 23:21 |
Legally they can call themselves Queen....and they still ROCK so they deserve to continue calling themselves Queen...Brian and Roger were the first two in this band and they are the remaining two now....Freddie's mom supports it and I'm POSITIVE Freddie would support it two if he was alive but had permanently lost his voice or was bedridden....John is okay with it as long as he's not having to be touring and dealing with millions of fans....and let's face it...if they called themselves the "Two lost sheep" or "Apple Pie" who would be going??? who would know who they were???....They are doing the big lights, the BIG rocking sound, and Brian and Roger are rocking as good as ever...so yes it is Queen, or Queen+, or Queen + Paul Rodgers or whatever...I don't really care as long as they keep playing Queen's music and rocking and giving real Queen fans the first thing to cheer about and get excited about in years!! Kudos to them!! Queen is the best band in the world! |
Fenderek 28.06.2005 03:47 |
the_hero wrote: there were 6 bass players before himApparently only three... Give me any name apart from Doug, Mike Grose and Barry Mitchell... Every single source states those, there's no mention of any other... I only heard John in some interview saying it was 6 or 7 but... how would he know if he wasn't in? |
brENsKi 28.06.2005 06:28 |
mercuryrocks wrote: I absolutely agree that Roger and Brian rocks and Queen consists of four in our hearts and everything... But I'm thinking of the legal side of it!legally and morally they have every right....freddie gave them his blessing to carry on...wtf was MIH all about then? also would you rather they just stopped - thenyou'd have f-all finally, why dojn't you ask the same questions about Deep Purple, Kiss, The Who, Floyd, Genesis, Yes, Iron maiden, AC/DC, and scores of other bands? give this one a dignified rest - it's been hashed and rehashed a thousand times on QZ....why can't you use the search button...it's there for a reason |
deleted user 28.06.2005 06:40 |
*loads the gun* |
The Mir@cle 28.06.2005 07:04 |
Sharon G. wrote: Does any one care what I think?Ever had that impression? |
RohemianBapsody 28.06.2005 08:09 |
Sharon G. wrote: Does any one care what I think?No, But go on tell us what you think, you may get BPP in on the thread as well. |
lady_mercury 28.06.2005 08:21 |
I think they are. I don't think that it's very good, but I'm sure, they've asked John. And if they had, then it'ok. And I'm happy about the fact, that they still find the energy to work on! rock on |
brian_may_wannabe 28.06.2005 08:22 |
They have the rights, they are the founding members. |
jona1 28.06.2005 16:37 |
i havn't looked at all the post's on this,so sorry if this has been mentioned. But it was Brain and Rodger who orginaly formed a band called smile all them years ago which became queen. so at the end of the day if it wasn't for them there would be no queen. so they have all the right in the world to call them selves queen +. correct me if i'm wrong |
Insomni@ 30.06.2005 17:01 |
jona1 wrote: But it was Brian and Roger who orginaly formed a band called smile all them years ago which became queen. so at the end of the day if it wasn't for them there would be no queen. so they have all the right in the world to call them selves queen +I entirely agree with you.You're right. After all,they call themselves Queen + as jona1 wrote... |
The Real Wizard 03.07.2005 22:19 |
Sharon G. wrote: Does any one care what I think?I thought I should respond with an outright NO. Sorry for the delay. |