Do they have to ask John's permission for using 'Queen' name?

Run out of ideas after Sebastians posting ?... probably! ...

I like Freddie Mercury
I hate Britney Spears (but you seem to like it if she does a song with brian and roger - so you are probably a fan of her!!!)

It all depends on the legal agreement within a band. As far as i'm aware, John DOES have the ability to stop them from using the name Queen. I'm sure there was an agreement that if one band member wasn't happy with something they had the ability to stop it... even if it was 3 against 1.

I don't care- as long as it's not robbie Williams they're playing with but some extremely talented rock legend- they can use name QUEEN, don't mind. PEOPLE- IT'S JUST A FUCKING NAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's the MUSIC that matters. If Freddie means so much to you- it's because of the MUSIC. The name is just it- five fucking letters. Who gives a fuck???!??!?!??!?!???
Spiritr of Freddie will never die. If Brian and Roger wants to tour- I'll be first on the stadium. And not one but few... And couldn't care less what name do they use... It's almost like religion discussions- everyone gets so freaking excited and the only thong we're talking about is NAME. What changed your life- NAME or THE MUSIC that this band was playing...? And if you don't like it- stay home and put on NATO again. I'll see some great show played by Brian, Roger and Paul... And couldn't care less under which banner... I've got more important problems in my life...

About Brian & Roger using the name.... I guess it wouldn't be so bad if they were still actively MUSICIANS and were at the top of their game. Theyre quite simply not. Roger struggles to play even the simples beats now and he doesn't seem to be able to put any power behind his playing.... Brian isn't the guitarist he once was either.... how could he be? He hasn't played properly for years, theyre out of shape and out of time.

But its not JUST a name. Theyre hardly going to produce any material with fucking Paul Rodgers that would be on par with even Queens worst material so they should leave it alone and MOVE ON. They aren't doing this for the MUSIC but doing it for the MONEY... surely this is quite clear?

COMPLETELY AGREED, Negative Creep

Negative Creep wrote:

But its not JUST a name. Theyre hardly going to produce any material with fucking Paul Rodgers that would be on par with even Queens worst material so they should leave it alone and MOVE ON. They aren't doing this for the MUSIC but doing it for the MONEY... surely this is quite clear?

No it's not... Paul Rodgers isn't a "catchy" name- half of Queen fans never heard of him...For money was thing with robbie or Britney... For money was The Works (that's my opinion anyway...)
This is a great rock guitarist with a great drummer (I'm sure after rehearsing they can put their act together!!!) with a great vocalist. Just for fun and because they enjoy it... I definitely want to be part of it- IMO it's toatlly stupid to dissmiss the thing just becuse of sucha thing as NAME... All I care is the MUSIC- if it will be bad- I'll criticise. If it's going to be good- what else do you want. Whinners- wake up- Fred is not going to be ressurected, alright?

the_hero wrote:

FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote:

Boooooooooooooooooooring

Well said Mr Fried, well said

I don't think this is a boring topic. I think its interesting to hear what all of our different opinions are on the possible upcoming tour of Queen's music with Brian, Roger, and Paul.

I'm not very concerned about what they decide to call themselves. I guess I look at the name as more of a label and not as important as how appealing the music will be with out Freddie singing it and John playing the bass on it.

I think they should call themselves Queen even though I know its not Queen as a whole and as we knew it bc it will be more marketable to the fans that stopped listening as much when Freddie died. It would be to Roger and Brian's benefit to use the name Queen when they go on tour I think. I guess it would be to John's benefit too if he is to get royalites from them touring. I certainly think they will make more money touring with Queen's name. I could be wrong though.

I'm going to make every effort I can to see Brian, Roger, and Paul, etc when the dates are announced. I'm excited to hear what they sound like no matter what name they go by. I do want them to call themselves Queen though. I don't necessarily have a good arguement on why I want it, but I just do. I think Freddie would be ok with it and I'm sure John is ok with it too. It's sort of like a father naming his son after him, an honor. I hope that makes sense.

That is just my opinion on this though. I don't expect everyone or anyone to share it with me but if you do, cool.

But I definitley don't think this is a boring topic. Its one of the better ones considering the poop that's been on here lately.

:)

We are not whinners ... but when I go to a concert I want to hear a band (or star) that`s more or less intact (that means can perform as they always did, like the Stones, Bowie or Duran Duran to name some from the old guard) .... I also said that I even would watch Brian or Roger (but not with some no-name like Paul Rodgers performing Freddie`s stuff)

Speaking of "The Works" (which is one of my favourite Queen albums), it wasn´t really done only for the money - without the mega-success of this album they would have been finished worlwide (so it was done to recapture their former glory) - that is a fact many Queen fans rather obmit

Who said Paul Rodgers was a catchy name? Why would it be a catchy name? It HIS name?! And I think you'll find most "old school" Queen fans will know exactly who he is.
It IS about the money, otherwise they wouldn't feel the need to use the name Queen. Come on... Brian & Roger aren't so great anymore... theyd need to rehearse for months and get in shape. If they honestly believed they were great muscians theyd be happy to carry on with solo material, or working together under a different guise.

They are musicians. They want to make music. They want to perform ! That's it ! And it's good. At least in my opinion.
I'm gonna get my tickets the day they go on sale - whatever the name of that Project is. We all know it is not Queen. But I want to see them on stage ! If you don't want to see them - don't buy tickets.

Christ. I think i'll assume something is getting lost in translation here.

Geez- man
Don't like it-
don't go
Sit at home and listen to Back To The Light and hope for Brian's solo tour... Or just whine about how good they used to be...
I don't give a s**t what are they doing for- even if it's really only for money, as long as I'm going to have a great fun at the gig- WHO CARESS!!!???? That's all that matters. If it's going to be good- who cares about the reason? We can't dissmiss it five months before, without seeing it just because of sentiments... That's pretty much my point...

Those guys changed my life. But it IS just the name- I love the music, not the banner...

I think John Deacon`s attitude towards Brian and Roger speaks volumes .... it`s not about the name, it`s because they want to ressurect something that is gone. They could form a new band or go solo and still play a sort of tribute to Queen`s music ... nothing to say against that.

But you all have to admit that they have run out of ideas - there is no other reason for their trashing of Queen songs together with the likes of Britney Spears, Robbie or 5ive.

Peter Cetera wrote:

But you all have to admit that they have run out of ideas - there is no other reason for their trashing of Queen songs together with the likes of Britney Spears, Robbie or 5ive.

But that's the thing- Paul Rodgers isn't 5ive or Britney or Robbie... Geez, they finally want to work with someone REALLY GOOD, some GREAT rock vocalist... Oh, whatever...