Legal battle over ukulele orchestra name

CeeJay said:
Pathetic...the only winners will be the legal profession .....and you really don't want to know what I think of them ......
Click to expand...

.......but it puts food on my table!:)


Honestly...I hope UOGB wins.

I remember one of my husband's first cases was very similar to this case. The people ripping off the logo lost.
 
UkeFoote said:
The lame-ness of this is of the first order. First of all, the biggest lame-ohs are the ones in Germany. Seriously, get a real name that isn't just an obvious rip off. Secondary lameness to the ones in England: get off your blooody high horses, mates.
Click to expand...

I second your view.
 
The UKUO is obviously a rip-off.

Whether or not the concept behind the UOGB is highly original is doubted here, although I give them full credit. Yes, wearing evening dress while playing ukuleles isn't that special (Hot Potato Syncopators), neither is mashing up pop covers (anyone really good on youtube) or arranging songs for multiple ukulele tunings (the Canadians were probably first) or having a name that sounds symphonic (Wellington UO, West Cork UO, Ukulele Club de Paris...). But combine those things, and you do have an original concept that only fits one band. This is the main point of the defense. They also partially admit that by saying they could drop the dress code or the name reference to the UK/GB.

Does it matter? That's the second point of defense: that it's all a big fuss about nothing. Well, given the touring schedule, CD and DVD production of the UOGB, I do think it hurts to copy them. This isn't amateurish, laid-back 'let's all play together' anymore, more than a few people have their livelyhood in it.

Will people be confused? Yes, I think so. We know the difference, because we're passionate about ukuleles and know our stuff. Most people who go to UOGB concerts are not like that: they heard or read about the concept, perhaps saw a snippet of a video, and want to have an evening out with music and a good laugh. They wouldn't know the names of band leaders or members, or the origins of the bands. That's different from say all the Abba-tribute bands that go around today. Even the Guardian journalist who researched the whole thing, initially mixed both orchestras up.

Why sue now? Well, I suppose basically because the UKUO tour Great Britain, while the UOGB is in the Far East, and that's the drop that tipped the bucket. Initially the law suit was only intended to prohibit advertisement for that particular tour (a request which the court turned down), although now it is more about the actual copying.
 
ukulelekarcsi said:
Does it matter? That's the second point of defense: that it's all a big fuss about nothing. Well, given the touring schedule, CD and DVD production of the UOGB, I do think it hurts to copy them. This isn't amateurish, laid-back 'let's all play together' anymore, more than a few people have their livelyhood in it.
Click to expand...

This. Plus, according to the article, the UKOB has conceded that it has "diluted" the brand and registered trademark of the UOGB shows intent on the former to ride the popularity of the latter.

And as said, this is the career and livelihood of the UOGB that we're talking about. This is not about a "tribute" band or anything like that (where it's very apparent that the group performing is NOT the original); they are causing confusion with customers who are buying tickets to see the wrong group. And that is directly affecting the UOGB's bottom line.

This isn't about playing ukulele, as I'm sure both groups do it very well and put on an excellent show. This is about brand identity and trademark, and the UOGB has a right to defend their brand.
 
I wonder what the first Symphony Orchestra thinks about this.
 
stevepetergal said:
I wonder what the first Symphony Orchestra thinks about this.
Click to expand...

Since the UOGB is different enough from an actual symphony orchestra, there likely will never be an issue. No one is going to buy tickets to the symphony and feel misled because they were expecting 8 ukulele players, and not 100+ orchestral musicians. However, the article has stated that people HAVE felt misled with buying tickets to - what they thought were UOGB shows - and upon arrival, finding out they were wrong.
 
One Bad Monkey said:
This. Plus, according to the article, the UKOB has conceded that it has "diluted" the brand and registered trademark of the UOGB shows intent on the former to ride the popularity of the latter.

And as said, this is the career and livelihood of the UOGB that we're talking about. This is not about a "tribute" band or anything like that (where it's very apparent that the group performing is NOT the original); they are causing confusion with customers who are buying tickets to see the wrong group. And that is directly affecting the UOGB's bottom line.

This isn't about playing ukulele, as I'm sure both groups do it very well and put on an excellent show. This is about brand identity and trademark, and the UOGB has a right to defend their brand.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. I'm amazed at how many people think it's petty that UOGB is taking steps to protect their brand. These people created something unique, and have every right to protect it. In the real world of business (and make no mistake, UOGB is a business), these are steps that need to be taken; under US law anyway (don't know UK law), failure to protect a brand can result in a loss of that brand.
 
A local folk club asked me for my opinion, when they were asked by a local theater about jointly promoting a TUKUO show. I sent her a link to the latest Guardian story, a link to the UOGB web site, let her know that I'm attending a UOGB show in Vermont in the spring, and that so long as TUKUO is using that name, I will neither attend, nor support their shows.

But if they can book the UOGB, I'll be first in line for tickets.


-Kurt​
 
Funny, I've finally dusted off and been reading a book I bought back in 2007: "The Secret Life of Houdini: The Making of America's First Superhero." Very a propos! Magicians were always worried about others stealing their tricks and performing them and passing them off as if they were their originals. I've often heard that was the same with upcoming comedians doing comedy gigs before the internet… pariahs stealing good jokes.

When Houdini started performing his most popular "Water Torture Cell" (the upside down water escape), he first preformed it England as a stage play (according to the book) and copyrighted it as a play. That’s very interesting. He didn't patent it. hehe

Petey
 
One Bad Monkey said:
Since the UOGB is different enough from an actual symphony orchestra, there likely will never be an issue. No one is going to buy tickets to the symphony and feel misled because they were expecting 8 ukulele players, and not 100+ orchestral musicians. However, the article has stated that people HAVE felt misled with buying tickets to - what they thought were UOGB shows - and upon arrival, finding out they were wrong.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was misunderstood. Here's what I meant:

I wonder if the first Symphony Orchestra would feel they had the rights to the title "Symphony Orchestra". It's the exact same question. Legally speaking, if the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain owns the words "Ukulele Orchestra" wouldn't it have to apply to the first Symphony Orchestra (whoever that would be) as well? I'd guess there have been hundreds of infringing organizations over the last century alone. A lawsuit worth millions (billions?).

The first Band, Ensemble, Quartet, Duo,.... Wow! Since the orchestra is really an instrument of sorts, would this apply to the piano, the violin, the ukulele? Does the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain own those rights?

One Dumb Guy's Opinion: The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain owns the rights to their name. Not any combination they choose of the words in it.
 
stevepetergal said:
I wonder if the first Symphony Orchestra would feel they had the rights to the title "Symphony Orchestra". It's the exact same question.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. A symphonic orchestra is the name of a group that includes strings, winds and brass. It's a general term, much like the quartet, trio, jazz combo, etc.. It's not until you make it specific that the title holds any weight.

The Detroit Symphonic Orchestra (or DSO) specifically refers to the symphonic orchestra of Detroit, MI. It is assumed that any recordings or performances involving the DSO or Detroit Symphony Orchestra will involve this specific group.

If another symphony started up in Rochester Hills, and called themselves the Motown Symphony Orchestra and started playing around the general SE part of Michigan, you'd have a major issue. While the names aren't exact, given that Detroit and Motown are basically synonymous with each other, you will cause general confusion with the general ticket buying public. This is the issue with the UOGB vs UKUO title dispute.


stevepetergal said:
One Dumb Guy's Opinion: The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain owns the rights to their name. Not any combination they choose of the words in it.
Click to expand...

The problem arises when the other name is "close enough" that it causes confusion between the two, and THAT is what they're fighting for. The other group (according to the article) has already conceded to "diluting" the brand identity of the UOGB, which I'm sure the prosecutor is going to use to argue that the UKUO did to intentionally "ride the coattails" of the UOGB.
 
Our uke group raised a thousand dollars to help finance the "other group" and all bought tickets not realizing it was not the original orchestra. I'm a little ticked off and feel it was dubious the group didn't make it clear who they were. The guy raising the money felt embarrassed he wasn't informed better. Dang this group isn't even from England but from Germany. If they are that accomplished, why not name themselves Ukulele Orchestra of Germany? No class at all imo.
 
I am not sure whether The United Kingdom Ukulele Orchestra (TUKUO) has infringed the patent rights of The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain (UOGB).

But I am really bothered if TUKUO is copying UOGB's performance style and concept. The two look FAR TOO SIMILAR.

 
Last edited:
Last November the UOGB played here and our Ukulele Club got to hang out the night before with them playing a few tunes. I think that is pretty standard for them. A great bunch of guys and gals, they even went through how that tackled a song. It was so much fun.
 
Patrick Madsen said:
Our uke group raised a thousand dollars to help finance the "other group" and all bought tickets not realizing it was not the original orchestra. I'm a little ticked off and feel it was dubious the group didn't make it clear who they were. The guy raising the money felt embarrassed he wasn't informed better. Dang this group isn't even from England but from Germany. If they are that accomplished, why not name themselves Ukulele Orchestra of Germany? No class at all imo.
Click to expand...

Went to the UKOB concert. It was really good.From their accents it sounded like they were all from Britain. I think they mentioned one was from Germany; may have been Peter Moss. They were good but still had a bitter feel to it thinking how we were led to believe it was the original group. I'd see them again for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Ukulele repossession (legal advice?)
Replies
16
Views
1K
Ukecaster
Ukecaster
H
Is this even legal? eBay "Pono" listing
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Rllink
Rllink
T
Ukulele Club Legal Status (UK)
Replies
10
Views
916
Tootler
Tootler
A
Song Help Request Legal advice
Replies
17
Views
3K
man0a
M
electrauke
How to make videos legal
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
electrauke
electrauke
Top Bottom