Posted on 11/27/2017 5:19:30 PM PST by nickcarraway
What’s the rationale behind demanding the bulletproof plexiglass come down? I couldn’t find it in the article.
Oops. Wrong thread.
I know. Steely’s version didn't do it any favors. Just my personal opinion. That album didn't need to have that song on it. It was an unnecessary departure from the vibe that album was all about. I often wondered why they included that song and figured maybe they needed a filler song.
"In our view, Mr. Fagen is unfairly trying to deprive Walter's family of the fruits of their joint labors," the estate said in a statement, adding that it had been working toward a compromise with Fagen's lawyers.
Fagen's attorney Skip Miller said Monday that "the agreement at the heart of the suit is as valid as the day it was signed."
"Mr. Fagen believes Mr. Becker's estate is entitled to receive all normal royalties on the songs they wrote together," he said. "But this case is about the future of the band, and we will vigorously defend the contract."
Seems to me the survivors are trying to take it all. And f**k the contract!
That's the one I was thinking of. GMTA.
The “Band” from this point forward is only Fagen. Walter Becker has no part in whatever Steely Dan produces now, nor should his heirs. What the heirs do have is a share of the royalties. What “goodwill” from the past boosts Steely Dan’s future endeavors, using the name “Steely Dan”, is what the “contract” seems to address.
This will be an interesting case that will generate more income for the lawyers than the defendant or plaintiff.
The only true Steely Dan Instrumental, and the only remake. (Of a Duke Ellington/James Miley song, with gong at the end for tribute)
However, Becker may have written a lot of the lyrics.
Sounds as if the heirs are expecting to profit from any future efforts of Fagen under the name Steely Dan, rather than being content merely collecting royalties from the music in which their father played a role. That sounds a little draconian, hence the likely reasoning behind the agreement of over 40 years ago. But, Fagen needs to tread carefully in pursuing this, lest he come across as some sort of ogre going after his dead partner’s children. That runs the risk of damaging or destroying the goodwill and future income potential of the band itself, however its constituted.
Loved me some Steely Dan.......pulled out the old CD’s after Walter died. Sure brought back memories. Forgot how much I loved Deacon Blues especially. Hate to hear all this mess about lawsuits and such..........sigh
We weren’t willing to pay megabucks for a concert of theirs either... however, we were visiting Biltmore on the day they had an outdoor concert. We heard them playing during the soundcheck. It was amazing! Especially hearing Steely Dan play Pink Floyd.
I agree.
It was chain lightning, it feels so good.
Hey Fagan, don’t forget to take one last drag before you approach the stand, and you better hope the Becker estate doesn’t sue you if you play too long, because you don’t want a name if you lose, or you’ll be singing Deacon Blues.
Fagan’s solo album Kamakiriad was a nifty cd, and was even nominated for a grammy.
The obvious measure of this was Fagan's ability to make some great solo albums, while Becker had nothing notable of his own.
Songwriter credits go to the songwriter, not to the band, so if Fagan writes any new songs for Steely Dan, he and any fellow songwriters get the songwriting revenue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.