• news
  • TUESDAY FEBRUARY 12 2008 5:00 PM

Edit: SG Lennon is Being Sued by Yoko Ono???

On February 12th, I wrote the following news story:

"I’ve never been a big fan of Yoko Ono. Though had you previously asked me to justify this opinion, I would have been at a loss. It was a view bequeathed to me by my father and his frequent voicing of what bitch he thought she was. But now I’ve been given some concrete evidence: she is suing Lennon.

Yes, she is suing Lennon, Lennon Murphy, the SG model and musician. Lennon is her real name, but Yoko Ono seems to think that the performer is “intentionally exploiting the name and confusing people by using it.” Lennon was, in fact, named after John Lennon and has been performing with that name since the age of 14.

Lennon is my first name by birth and I am regularly asked if I was named after the Beatle, having always replied no. My mother named me after "John Lennon that wrote songs, painted, and baked bread with his son". She named me for the man, not the pop star.



Lennon claims that Yoko Ono has been aware of her name and its usage since 2000, when a lawyer at Arista Records presented the widow with the information. In 2003, Lennon trademarked the name with the United States Patent and Trademark office, and everything seemed to be copasetic. Fast-forward to now – two days before the statute of limitations on the trademark was to expire – the same lawyer has brought forward a suit against Lennon Murphy for use of the name. She is being accused of misleadingly representing herself, causing confusing in the marketplace, and tarnishing John Lennon’s name.

Lennon has posted an open letter on her website and Myspace page, from which the following is an excerpt:

I'm not sure what confusion I could be causing since I don't have the $50,000 to hire a lawyer and fight this. If people were confusing me with John Lennon and accidently buying my records I should have more than enough money to live my life and hire a lawyer? I wish that was the case. I haven't worked since Oct. 2007, so I live on just enough to get through the months until I get back on the road. I have no idea what I'm going to do yet in this situation, and I'm stressed, angry, and scared.

This is my life. I have no respect for the name Murphy. It was my father's name we will leave it at that. I have represented myself as Lennon because this is my name. That was the name that meant so much to my mother. That's who I am. I'm pissed and hurt that someone in Yoko's position has nothing better to do than fuck with my life, and collect the $25,000,000 a year that the John Lennon estate brings in. Yes, this is a real number or close enough to it. This is how I look at it. With that kind of income she probably pays more in taxes every year the you or I will make in our whole life time. So what do I have that can be of such value to her after 8 years. I don't want to lose my name all because someone is bored in their life of luxury.

I don't know what's going to be the outcome, but I just wanted everyone to know what is going on. I never falsified my intentions, I never used John Lennon for my benefit, and I never took one cent out of Yoko's bank account. I play music, my name is Lennon, and the most heartbreaking thing out of this whole situation is the insult it gives to my late mother and who she believed in; on top of demeaning the man that John Lennon was and will always be.



And I agree. So here’s to supporting Lennon, a fellow Suicide Girl, against the incomprehensible greed of Yoko Ono. Yoko Ono, the woman whose February 2007 remix album is entitled Yes, I’m a Witch.

And, for the record, we're not alone - even Julian Lennon has voiced his support.




Fatality is just glad that Lennon is the SG and not Yoko Ono. *shudder*"

Since then, however, forthcoming information has necessitated a reworking of that story. On February 14, a reaction letter from Yoko Ono was distributed. In this letter, Yoko claims that the previous claims of a suit against Lennon Murphy are untrue.

A musician named Lennon Murphy is claiming that Yoko Ono has sued her and that Yoko is seeking to stop Lennon Murphy from performing under her name, Lennon Murphy. Both of these claims are untrue.

Several years ago, Lennon Murphy sought Yoko's permission to do her performances under her name, Lennon Murphy. Yoko, of course, did not object to her request. Subsequently, without Yoko's knowledge, Lennon Murphy filed an application in the United States trademark Office requesting the exclusive right to utilize the name "Lennon" for musical performances. Yoko's attorneys asked Lennon Murphy's attorneys and manager to withdraw her registration of exclusivity to the name LENNON for the trademark. Yoko also offered to cover all costs Lennon Murphy had incurred in filing for the trademark. But Lennon Murphy went ahead to register.

Yoko did not sue Lennon Murphy, but sought to stop her from getting the exclusive right to the name Lennon for performance purposes. For that, Yoko's attorneys, simply notified the Trademark office that Yoko did not believe it was fair that Ms. Murphy be granted the exclusive right to the "Lennon" trademark in relation to musical and entertainment services. As you can see, this is a very important issue for Yoko and the Lennon family.

Yoko says: "I am really hurt if people thought that I told a young artist to not use her own name in her performances and had sought to sue her. I did no such thing. I hope this allegation will be cleared.



It will be interesting to see how this all pans out as the feverish frenzy from the previous reporting simmers down...we can disentangle the relative distribution between misunderstanding, publicity intents, poor journalism, fulfillment of expectations and desires, misapprehension of the law, and all of the other factors that can combine to create such a headline. The truth seems a bit obscured right now, but if any additional news or commentaries from the two women arise, I will be sure to further update the story.

Fatality has edited.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 19

Next

Comments
smithers_jones

smithers_jones

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 03:18 PM

Squire said:

PointBlank said:

Shalome said:

Betsey said:
its so sad to see that this woman has to bring down this poor girl because she has the name of her late husband.... u know how many people out there have probably named their son or daughter Lennon or hell lets go with John after her late and dear husband?!?!?!? seriously... anyone who had a child back when John died and whom was a huge fan prolly named their child Lennon. ive met 3 other Lennon's.. does she wanna come find them too???




*headdesk*


Just give up. No one wants to listen to anything but what they want to hear.



Yep. I realize intellectual property can be difficult to grasp at times, but they aren't even trying.


I hear courts rarely decide these issues on matters on law anymore, rather they are decided on the basis of the prevailing opinion expressed on litigants Myspace pages.

Squire

Squire

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 03:20 PM

Karma said:

Squire said:
Here is the most important question regarding this issue. Ready? Be honest with your response:


With whom do you associate the name "Lennon?"


Your response will give you an idea about who is most likely to prevail in this dispute.






(yes I know its spelled different)



I loved it!! wink I'll bet John would have loved it too.

Karma

Karma

SUICIDEGIRL

Pennsylvania, USA

FEB 13, 2008 03:20 PM

Shalome said:

Yep. Another question to ask would be "If a reasonable average person saw a CD labelled LENNON, would they be likely to think it was a John Lennon CD they weren't familiar with?"





Does anyone think this looks like it could be a John Lennon CD?

Sound

Sound

I'm lost
January 2004

FEB 13, 2008 03:24 PM

Wow im surprised this is the first time Howard has heard of Suicide Girls.

Nice to hear everyone support her.

2 days off in a row for Artie! Uh oh.

SocietysPliers

SocietysPliers

Ocala, FL
October 2004

FEB 13, 2008 03:30 PM

^^^ John Lennon, first

Then Julian Lennon

Then Lennon

Then Sean Lennon

Then, Lenin

Then Yoko.

I understand Yoko has all the money in theworld top try to thwart a newcomer's career and that when it comes to money, the underdog has little chance against someone who can afford to buy the courts out.

That said, she will HAV to buy into a crooked court system to get them to disallow this.

And yeah, what about Beck?biggrin Is that his first name?

On that, admittedly, Squire, to this day whenever I hear someone mention Beck I do indeed think of Jeff. so there is that.

But so the fuck what? As far as I know, Jeff Beck doesn't give a flying flooptywoof. And, Beck is indeed calling himself by a variation on his own first name., and I suppose Jeff Beck is coherent enough to realize that Beck Lite has no bearing whatsoever on him.

Squire

Squire

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 03:34 PM

Karma said:

Shalome said:

Yep. Another question to ask would be "If a reasonable average person saw a CD labelled LENNON, would they be likely to think it was a John Lennon CD they weren't familiar with?"





Does anyone think this looks like it could be a John Lennon CD?





shocked

SocietysPliers

SocietysPliers

Ocala, FL
October 2004

FEB 13, 2008 03:44 PM

That's the first time I saw her CD cover. Now I KNOW there shouldn't be any confusion. As a longtime John Lennon fan, I could never assume/imagine that it was an album by John.

Although . . . I do admit the name on the cover might spark my curiosity and I might pick it up and look at it, whereas I might not have otherwise. FWIW.

I figure I wouldn't be the only one (or even the first) to get a Lenin comment posted. I try to show my allegiance to Lenin & Marx from time to time

Noctua

Noctua

San Francisco, CA
February 2004

FEB 13, 2008 03:51 PM

There was a similar case to this that I remember regarding Nissan. Nissan.com is owned not by the motor company, but by a guy whose name is actually Nissan. Nissan Motor Corp has tried suing them for the domain name and misuse of name and all that crap. The courts have ruled that he could keep the domain and told Nissan Motor Co to stuff if. They appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, but were denied an appeal.

It's unfortunate that SG Lennon has to deal with this, but hopefully precedent will be on her side.

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

FEB 13, 2008 03:57 PM

Karma said:

Shalome said:

Yep. Another question to ask would be "If a reasonable average person saw a CD labelled LENNON, would they be likely to think it was a John Lennon CD they weren't familiar with?"





Does anyone think this looks like it could be a John Lennon CD?


Exactly.

-TM

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

FEB 13, 2008 04:01 PM

Noctua said:
There was a similar case to this that I remember regarding Nissan. Nissan.com is owned not by the motor company, but by a guy whose name is actually Nissan. Nissan Motor Corp has tried suing them for the domain name and misuse of name and all that crap. The courts have ruled that he could keep the domain and told Nissan Motor Co to stuff if. They appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, but were denied an appeal.

It's unfortunate that SG Lennon has to deal with this, but hopefully precedent will be on her side.


Here's the suit you speak of.

Also that. Anyone w/a brain can tell SG Lennon is in no way trying to associate herself w/John Lennon, aside from the history of her name. She is also not trying to cause confusion due to her name. Reminds me of when Universal tried to sue Nintendo over Donkey Kong.

-TM

Squire

Squire

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 04:03 PM

SocietysPliers said:
I understand Yoko has all the money in theworld top try to thwart a newcomer's career and that when it comes to money, the underdog has little chance against someone who can afford to buy the courts out.



Look, I'm not a huge Yoko fan either. But there is nofuckingway she's doing this to thwart anyone's career; what does she stand to gain by doing so? Shit, the fact that she didn't do anything when the offending mark was brought to her attention, and that she had what I can only assume is very competent legal representation who would fill her in on any legal issues concerning the offending mark, arguably demonstrates that she isn't out to piss in anyone's Cheerios. She is only doing what TM law says she must do in order to protect HER intellectual property.

And "buying the courts out?" Drivel. Anyone who has spent any time litigating in federal court and has any respect for our legal system would laugh you out of Dodge.

SocietysPliers said:
That said, she will HAV to buy into a crooked court system to get them to disallow this.



Again, please refrain from referring to the United States federal courts as crooked unless you have any examples or proof thereof. And as I've said, she'd be better off cutting her losses and not buying into anything at all. 'Cause she'll probably lose. Any decent lawyer who isn't out to scheister her out of legal fees will probably tell her the same thing.

SocietysPliers said:
And yeah, what about Beck?biggrin Is that his first name?



I don't know. Did Jeff Beck TM his name? If so, did he take any steps to prevent Beck from using it? Was/is Jeff Beck ever known as "Beck?" Can he provide survey data that demonstrates that people associate the name "Beck" with Jeff Beck?

Squire

Squire

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 04:10 PM

thefreak said:

Karma said:

Shalome said:

Yep. Another question to ask would be "If a reasonable average person saw a CD labelled LENNON, would they be likely to think it was a John Lennon CD they weren't familiar with?"





Does anyone think this looks like it could be a John Lennon CD?


Exactly.

-TM



Arguably relevant, yet not conclusive/decisive.

Squire

Squire

I'm lost
November 2003

FEB 13, 2008 04:17 PM

thefreak said:
Also that. Anyone w/a brain can tell SG Lennon is in no way trying to associate herself w/John Lennon, aside from the history of her name. She is also not trying to cause confusion due to her name.



Irrelevant. This isn't a fucking criminal case. Intent is not at issue.

Fuck people, go and Google, oh I don't know, "trademark," "descriptive," "surname," "infringement," and so on.

My soup is getting cold.

thefreak

thefreak

NEWSWIRE

Gardner, MA

FEB 13, 2008 04:21 PM

Squire said:
Irrelevant. This isn't a fucking criminal case. Intent is not at issue.

Fuck people, go and Google, oh I don't know, "trademark," "descriptive," "surname," "infringement," and so on.

My soup is getting cold.


And why don't you check the links I posted that show there is precedent and the court could easily tell Yoko, in much nicer-sounding legalese, to go screw herself.

-TM

SocietysPliers

SocietysPliers

Ocala, FL
October 2004

FEB 13, 2008 04:38 PM

Squire said:
Again, please refrain from referring to the United States federal courts as crooked

I did ABSOLUTELY NO SUCH THING. Read. However, having worked in the court system, I have a lot of respect for it. Amidst that awareness I can not turn a blind eye to the fact that there have been and of course surely are still, corrupt individuals in it, as in ANY business or gorup of people. I find it hard to believe you think everyone in the court system is honest. Maybe those in the courst system that have been caught were all set up and are all quite Saintly, but I personally doubt that.

Did Jeff Beck TM his name? If so, did he take any steps to prevent Beck from using it? Was/is Jeff Beck ever known as "Beck?" Can he provide survey data that demonstrates that people associate the name "Beck" with Jeff Beck?

I doubt Jeff Beck trademarked his name, as he would likely be able to see the possiblity that others might happen to have the same name ansd he would be a huge ass to do so.

As far as I know, Jeff Beck was only known as "Beck" in groups, like "Clapton, Page & Beck." And Beck Lite is actually named Beck . . well, actually "Bek."

That said, I never heard John Lennon go by "Lennon," either. I HAVE heard him called "John," as in "John, Paul, George & Ringo" or "John & Yoko."


While I'm no huge Yoko fan, I've never had anything against her, and in fact, enjoyed immensely one of her art exhibitions years ago, and an old friend of mine who has interacted with her at somewhat less than a 'friend" level, but more than just an "acquaintance," thinks the world of her.

BUT . . . I just can't see the problem with someone naming their band after their name and wanting to protect that nwame. If John Lennon had a band called Lennon, I'd hope he would have done that. But he had the Plastic Ono Band, and some old quartet from Liverpool that never quite caught on before that. NOT Lennon.

If Lennon seemed to be trying to sound like John or pass herself off as him or called her band "John Lennon," then yes, there should be an issue made.

I DO see your point, though. When the young Beck started to get big, EVERYONE I knew to a person - no exceptions - immediately thought Jeff Beck had put out something new - unti they heard it.

Maybe it's the same with Lennon. There may be a few who think there's a new John Lennon album out, but since he was never called "Lennon," and has been dead for nearly 30 years, I oubt it.

As I admitted earlier, I might be inspired to pick up an album by someoen named "Lennon" purely because of what John Lennon has meant to be, just as I looked at an album by young Beck just because I was a Jeff Beck fan and the name, although from the album cover, like with Lennon's, I can easily dismiss any assumptions that it was a JEFF Beck album.

But I will digress this much. Due to what I just said, it could be looked upon by hungry lawyers as capitalizing on John Lennon's name, although if said lawyers have any awareness of Reality and have the acuity of a grade schooler, they could fathom that Lennon HAPPENS to be her name.

Anyway, please google the judicial system for corruption, and while a wonderful system it is, you will be sure to find that there have, despite your protests, been - and will continue to be - many cases of corruption.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 19

Next