RANDY RHOADS' Family Sues Margolis and Klein

[NicDots]

I think this site and TK are different in approaches. I have been a member at both sites and prefer this liberal, non-stuffy place to that Brown Shirt Run place.

Like Joe, I'm just terribly saddened that nothing ever seems to work out, which is bad for us the fans I guess even the family. I'm sure that they want something professionally/legally done that documents their son/brother. To think that some many people who have worked with them have dropped the ball over and over again probably leaves their heads spinning too. We will just have to accept the fact that we may never get anything, ever. And as a result of that, there will be less and less interest amongst newer fans to this type of music.

[rice_pudding]

Speaking of old members... hope your are doing well NicDots!

Rob

[camdenlp]

Although I'm new(er) to being a big RR fan, I think the lack of material hurts the legacy in the long run. Even though there will be younger people who find RR and grow to love him and his music, newer generations will have new guitar idols to follow and many would be Randy fans will find somebody they can watch play and hear their rock n roll stories. Not the 'holier than thou' image we've been force fed for all this time. I'm sure that compared to Ozzy and other rockers, Randy probably WAS somewhat of a saint. But that's not to say that a young man of 24-25 didn't live a little on the road. It's really mind-boggling what exactly could holding back do to actually HELP Randy's estate? Maybe there are some things better left unsaid? I don't know. I just know that for the few short years I have been a big fan, I've been let down enough. Which is why I feel for you guys who have been waiting for nearly 31 years now for these things. I was born 18 months after Randy passed, but he still is my inspiration to play and always will be. I would've loved to have seen him play live, and how somehow, someday, real footage will see the light. But, at this point...I'm not counting on anything, which will keep me from further let downs. Hopefully

[GUITARIDOL5682]

Ultimate Rhoads and TK need to merge..

nah.
if things are "moving slow" here, TK is pretty much dead.

You'd be surprised how many fans visit this site. If you notice when you post a new photo or something of interest. In 24 hours it will get hit enough to realise the site is more popular then just the new threads that are active. It has always had more viewers then contributors.

[clashradio]

Although I'm new(er) to being a big RR fan, I think the lack of material hurts the legacy in the long run.

I disagree. Look at Ritchie Valens. The guy had a career of all but 8 months. He died in 1959, Hollywood made a big budget movie in 1987.

[camdenlp]

To your point, sir...I'm not sure I would know the name had it not been for that film 38 years later.

[Geo Sav]

What we forget is Ritchie's estate will let a movie be made and released! Not Randy's!

[RRFan4Ever]

What a mind bloggling clusterf*ck. Seriously. I've gone back and revisted my own words as things have progressed in this situation- and I can't make sense of my own thoughts/emotions in regards to this.

Why is it so difficult to promote Randy's legacy with class? Is it that the people entrusted by the family seem to have a misunderstanding as to what would be deemed class or professionalism? Some may take this as an opportunity to further bash the Rhoads, but they have been quite accomodating and open to the fans since, well forever. I even spoke to Mrs Rhoads on the phone back in 1989, I kick myself for bothering her then but she was pleased to hear from me and another friend that was with me at the time. She spoke lovingly and articulately of the son she loved and the son she knew. I doubt that any other mothers out there would want to examine the intracasies of their children's behavior with friends or whatnot- but especially given that Randy was on the strip at a young age, making a name for himself. I guess I'm not surprised that the family is uncomfortable with the lack of control and direction that these new materials bring to light. Also, let's not forget that Randy's marker was stolen twice before they built his new resting place. They've been through a lot, too. I knew there would be some commotion caused at some point with these materials, but what I didn't expect the amount of heat immdiately put to the Rhoads family/estate.

As far as Ritchie Valens and Randy Rhoads, I think the biggest issue is not only would someone have to get the family's blessing, but also contend with the Osbournes- and also the other associates and estates of associates of those that worked with Randy. I think copywrite law has stifled Randy's legacy more than any person/s could. Huge difference between 1987 and now- not just in the term of laws but also society itself.

As a sidenote, however- they are beginning pre-production of a movie for Bon Scott in Australia.

http://blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode= ... mID=185093

[Geo Sav]

No doubt the osbournes and copyright are big reasons for most of the lack of material.

[shred2]

The reason that copyright is such a major issue with regards to Rhoads material is the original Kerslake/Daisley vs. The O's lawsuit.
Simply put, it has set the tone for all the following debacles, unfortunately.

It would be interesting to know how the relationship between the Rhoads estate and Sony works too. I believe Sony has more say in this relationship than we know. Case in point - the re-issues with the 'fake rhythm section'. Wouldn't the Rhoads estate have to sign off on their release?

BTW, Graceland was on the verge of foreclosure before 'someone' took control of the reigns and maintained the King's legacy.

[Stiltzkin]

Case in point - the re-issues with the 'fake rhythm section'. Wouldn't the Rhoads estate have to sign off on their release?

don't think so. I believe Sony owns the rights to those 2 albums and the family doesn't have much say there.
but I'm not 100% sure though.

[shred2]

That would be interesting to know.
Ditto the O's actually. Did Sony tell them or ask them to do the re-issues?

[RRFan4Ever]

I don't think that Daisley/Lee are responsible for the tone that copyrite allows Ozzy control over his intellectual property, material, or likeness. I think this case comes down to the fact that the Rhoads have rights over Randy's name and likeness, also that they signed a contract for a documentary (that was "abysmal") and ended up involuntarily contributing a large amount of material to a separate endeavor instead (the book). I don't know who owns the material Randy left behind, but that would be interesting to know.

[hansolo]

Those 2002 albums were abysmal. If the family controls Randy's likeness, etc, how was that ever approved? NO, SONY DIDN'T FORCE THEM TO DO IT, IT WAS SHARON AND THE LEE/DAISLEY LAWSUIT. That was allowed to see the light of day.

[shred2]

Who decided that those two albums needed to be 're-issued'?
Sony or the Osbournes?