RANDY RHOADS' Family Sues Margolis and Klein

[RhoadsRockPhotographer]

I'm fully behind this lawsuit.

Klein and Margolis can eat fecal fudgesicles.

[Geo Sav]

The fans suffer in the end. That's the Sad part of any of this.

[Stiltzkin]

Releasing randy material isnt about wishy washy interpretations and "painting randy in a favorable only light."

depends on who you ask

[dannyahansen]

Ah more bullshit. This stuff is making me mad. Maybe I will just go post over at Jason Becker's site. He is the only other person that holds a candle to Randy. And people come together for him and make things work. It really is a shame. The fans are the ones that really get screwed with all of this.

I remember back in 2006 being so excited to find not one but two sites dedicated to Randy. THe other site is all but dead and this one barely limps along. Then we get more news about this debacle. We wont ever see anything about Randy again and now there is so much negative associated with Randy (As far as that back and forth drama over the years) that I fear this will taint his legacy. Oh well.


PS. Frank I have always enjoyed your comments. I hope you will still post despite some major disagrements between you and some board members.

[dannyahansen]

I'm fully behind this lawsuit.

Klein and Margolis can eat fecal fudgesicles.

I am too. If they did indeed violate thier contract they should be held accountable. I think people for get that this country (The USA) was founded as a country of laws not of men.

I want to see as much stuff of Randy's as we can but if stuff is done by breaking the law I have an issue with that.

[shawn]

I'm fully behind this lawsuit.

Klein and Margolis can eat fecal fudgesicles.

I am too. If they did indeed violate thier contract they should be held accountable. I think people for get that this country (The USA) was founded as a country of laws not of men.

I want to see as much stuff of Randy's as we can but if stuff is done by breaking the law I have an issue with that.

I would have to say that I am behind the Rhoads family too. If someone ripped me off there would only be two choices, and only one of them is legal.

I would love to see more Randy footage; I would love to see more attention brought the way of, in my opinion, the greatest guitar player of that error. His playing after all this time still gets my blood pumping.

But fuck it theft is theft; if the Rhoads family feel they have been ripped off and they can prove it, all the more power to them.

[dannyahansen]

I I would love to see more attention brought the way of, in my opinion, the greatest guitar player of that error. His playing after all this time still gets my blood pumping.

.

You mean era? It's ok I do this all the time.

[shawn]

I I would love to see more attention brought the way of, in my opinion, the greatest guitar player of that error. His playing after all this time still gets my blood pumping.

.

You mean era? It's ok I do this all the time.

Oh shit that was an awesome error. Nice catch, I’m just proving I cannot multi task I guess.

[shred2]

Totally agree with the comments with regards to Jason Becker and his documentary.
Note that his family actually participated in the film.

I have also come to the conclusion that Delores Rhoads isn't a rock fan, and is mildly in denial that her son made his name in the rock and roll arena. Through the years, she seemed to light up when the discussion was about RR's 'future' university plans and classical guitar, but the rock stuff.... not so much. She was supportive, but that doesn't mean she totally approved either.
Mothers do that sometimes.

Winning this case is not a slam dunk either. Despite the distaste exhibited here for the documentary makers, I gotta believe they were not so naive as to just 'take the photos and run'. If they did, well, it will cost them.

[GUITARIDOL5682]

I cannot see whay they would use material knowing people like Bob Daisley and others would pick the book up and check to see what material was inside. All the photos have a licence fee that was paid before the docu went tits up. The private photographs have been used with the original owners permission. i.e Jodi's material and paragraphs from her postcards and letters. I put this down to the Rhoads thinking that they've salvaged the film in book form. They must of seen it to do the comparison so what are they getting pissed at. I've looked at every page and i cannot see any of the contents being bad or something that has been used without permission. I put this down to pure jealousy and it could of been a project the Rhoads could of passionately got involved with. roll eyes icon If they think the writers are going to retire on this one. I don't think they'll be lucky to get back what they've spent to put the book together, with only about 500 books sold and another 1200 to be sold. That's if this court shit doesn't put a total block on it selling another copy. The writers should know if the case is going ahead or if its been laughed out of court. The original case was filed by the Rhoads on the 6th December and it has to be answered 30 days later.

[GUITARIDOL5682]

Winning this case is not a slam dunk either. Despite the distaste exhibited here for the documentary makers, I gotta believe they were not so naive as to just 'take the photos and run'. If they did, well, it will cost them.

I know that the photographers have been paid including 2 of them i'm friends with. The book had to be done without any risks of it clashing with the Dakota docu. That was handed over to Dakota in its unedited form. When it was edited and seen by Peter and Andrew they nearly shat themselves as it was edited so badly. That is one of the main reasons it got shelved as it looked so amaturish not like the original trailer we'd seen. So i'm not surprised something was done to replenish the time and effort wasted doing the docu. The interviews had to be redone but not the amount that originaly appeared in the docu. Plus the photographs had already been paid for the licence to be used. I don't know if they would of had to be paid again because the docu was shelved ?.

[shred2]

I put this down to pure jealousy and it could of been a project the Rhoads could of passionately got involved with

Nailed it, IMHO.
There is no profit in this book venture. I am guessing they are taking a loss.
I agree with your scale of sales too....
I put the anniversary box set in the same field of numbers, in terms of sales.

Not sure why all the 'players' in the Rhoads saga believe they are sitting on a massive payday, as recent release sales prove otherwise.
Sharon knows how may copies of the box set were purchased. So should the Rhoads family.
I believe they are still intoxicated on the fumes of the past.

I think it is all too late, by about 20 years.

[RRFan4Ever]

I cannot see whay they would use material knowing people like Bob Daisley and others would pick the book up and check to see what material was inside. All the photos have a licence fee that was paid before the docu went tits up. The private photographs have been used with the original owners permission. i.e Jodi's material and paragraphs from her postcards and letters. I put this down to the Rhoads thinking that they've salvaged the film in book form. They must of seen it to do the comparison so what are they getting pissed at. I've looked at every page and i cannot see any of the contents being bad or something that has been used without permission.

But isn't that the problem itself- that those materials were originally aquired using the premise of the docu? I mean, they weren't flying all over the US and the rest of the world to buy the rights to those materials separately of the documentary. I think that whether the books and the documentary are similar is of moot point as IMHO the docu itself was done exactly to piss the family off to the point that they shut it down, and that commotion certainly caused backlash. I personally do not believe that Peter was completely shut out of the editing process.

Despite the fact that I wasn't present on these boards to the extent that I am now, I have read the drama and seen the craziness that ensued (thankfully, without witnessing the Mike Smalt photos) and some in that camp are not worthy to receive a single dollar using the name or likeness of Randy. There was some horrible shit that went on and some rather unbalanced characters that surfaced in the making of that documentary.

And maybe that is exactly why the family has kept a certain silence in this all along? I can't say as I'm not a member of that "circle" nor any other circle that may encompass it. However, I am a fan and dedicated to Randy- his short life shouldn't be the source of profit for the bastards that leaked the Smalt photos or argued with and taunted fans.

But that's just me.

[hansolo]

"The original case was filed by the Rhoads on the 6th December and it has to be answered 30 days later." On Randy's Birthday? Wow. I guess they were late to the cemetery to make sure Randy's legacy stays buried. Try the wine...

I don't know what he said/she said. Photos? How many photos are we talking? I imagine there was a contract (for the movie) and money was spent filming. I don't know Peter but people tend to get tense if they are told they spent their money on something they can't use. The go ahead was given, yes? I could watch a bootleg of people talking about Randy who knew him, so I don't buy that it looks unprofessional because it's a DOCUMENTARY. Having to use Kelly's music would be like selling wine, I mean selling out. I didn't know that Peter was a student of Randy's who had taped a lesson, until I saw it on the DVD. I wonder if the lawsuit is retaliation for putting out the RR the QR years book/DVD? Did anybody else find it weird in the Ron Sobol interview that he said something to the effect that he didn't need permission from the Rhoads family?

This just sucks but I suppose there are always bootlegs. How long can they hold on to this stuff? I can see it now, all my hair is white and thinning. I hobble out to the mailbox with my cane and see my copy of the entire Entertainment Tonight footage with various soundchecks/interviews and another disc of the entire New Jersey '81 show (1 cam or 2 - who cares?) had arrived. The great joy turns to pain as I clutch my heart with one hand and stare at the unwatched DVD in the other...

[PeroRope]

"The original case was filed by the Rhoads on the 6th December and it has to be answered 30 days later." On Randy's Birthday? Wow. I guess they were late to the cemetery to make sure Randy's legacy stays buried. Try the wine...

+1