Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators

Hoax Investigation => General Hoax Investigation => General Hoax Talk => Topic started by: msteetee34 on May 19, 2010, 02:03:38 AM

Title: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: msteetee34 on May 19, 2010, 02:03:38 AM
I was just thinking this to myself today.  Okay if MJ really passed why would the Jackson brothers still want to be called the Jackson five?  When Jermaine left the group and Randy joined they were called The Jacksons.  I thought they gave up the right to use Jackson Five in order to be released from Motown to join Epic records.  So since Randy is still around wouldn't that be more logical if they plan to make a new album and tour if MJ really passed?  Then if they called themselves the Jacksons they could add any of the Jackson family memebers but Jackson Five can't be changed.  Jackson five will always be Michael, Marlon, Jermaine, Jackie, and Tito.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: VeryLittleSusie on May 19, 2010, 05:30:59 AM
I've been always wondering about that...  :?
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: reasonables+luvs+MJ on May 19, 2010, 07:51:22 AM
Actually, I've always thought about that, but I never cared about it; I think that's just a dead give away that proves MJ is alive. :D
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: suspicious mind on May 19, 2010, 08:26:29 AM
so what is the status of motown in their 50th anniversary year? i have been wondering about this.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: tabloidburn on May 19, 2010, 08:31:28 AM
what strikes me more here is the fact that motown owned the name 'jackson 5' back then (like a trademark) and if i understood that right, they had to change the name to 'the jacksons' for copyright reasons. i don't quite get how they can use that name when motown should still have that copyright (lasts 70 years?), unless that ran out cuz it was an old contract and the duration of copyrights was changed after that.

@reasonables: 'dead' giveaway... :lol:  :lol:  :lol: brilliant!

 :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: Tina K. on May 19, 2010, 08:36:28 AM
I think it's because, the brothers think they will sell more if it's " The jackson five ", cause when people hear that, they think Michael= more money.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: GirlSaturday on May 19, 2010, 09:15:29 AM
The Jacksons were less popular and less successful than the Jackson 5. The only wrench in this is how Motown is allowing them to make references to the name that the label owns. Unless...the new spelling Jack5ons is the loop hole to avoid a legal battle. Motown may be remaining silent because a lawsuit would show them in a negative light since the world thinks that MJ is dead and legal action would be in poor taste.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: Styloprincess on May 19, 2010, 10:11:36 AM
Quote from: "Tina K."
I think it's because, the brothers think they will sell more if it's " The jackson five ", cause when people hear that, they think Michael= more money.

that's what I think too :roll:
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: CC on May 19, 2010, 10:32:19 AM
Quote from: "tabloidburn"
what strikes me more here is the fact that motown owned the name 'jackson 5' back then (like a trademark) and if i understood that right, they had to change the name to 'the jacksons' for copyright reasons. i don't quite get how thex can use that name when motown should still have that copyright (lasts 70 years?), unless that ran out cuz it was an old contract and the duration of copyrights was changed after that.

@reasonables: 'dead' giveaway... :lol:  :lol:  :lol: brilliant!

 :mrgreen:

MAYBE THEY HAVE THE NEW CONTRACT WITH MOTOWN... WHAT ABOUT THE NEW COMPANY OF JOE JACKSON AND MOTOWN? ANY CONECTION? :roll:
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: suspicious mind on May 19, 2010, 03:30:54 PM
it is now universal motown something like that.i think the universal part being some type of investment group.apparently barry gordy wasn't very involved in the 50th anniversary activities.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: steph on May 19, 2010, 03:46:52 PM
With all this talk of motown  and records has anyone herd about joe`s ranch records deal?
just curious that`s all.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: GirlSaturday on May 19, 2010, 03:49:31 PM
Motown is part of Universal but still is viewed as Motown because of the historic success of the label. I find it interesting that Motown marked several anniversaries with lavish tv specials and highly publicized celebration. However, a big anniversary such as their 50th was brushed over and with little fanfare. Even if Berry wasn't involved, I would have expected the label to mark such an important anniversary. Fans would have enjoyed the nostalgia of seeing so many singers and groups reunite as well. The same holds true for the Jackson 5's 40th anniversary in the business. Last year should have been one big party to commemorate both anniversaries. Odd...

Quote from: "suspicious mind"
it is now universal motown something like that.i think the universal part being some type of investment group.apparently barry gordy wasn't very involved in the 50th anniversary activities.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: CC on May 19, 2010, 04:26:38 PM
Quote from: "suspicious mind"
it is now universal motown something like that.i think the universal part being some type of investment group.apparently barry gordy wasn't very involved in the 50th anniversary activities.

REALLY? UNIVERSAL??
 :shock:
LA TOYA
JANET
PAULL ANKA
ORIANTHI
ALL WITH UNIVERSAL... :roll:
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: suspicious mind on May 19, 2010, 05:36:06 PM
Quote from: "GirlSaturday"
Motown is part of Universal but still is viewed as Motown because of the historic success of the label. I find it interesting that Motown marked several anniversaries with lavish tv specials and highly publicized celebration. However, a big anniversary such as their 50th was brushed over and with little fanfare. Even if Berry wasn't involved, I would have expected the label to mark such an important anniversary. Fans would have enjoyed the nostalgia of seeing so many singers and groups reunite as well. The same holds true for the Jackson 5's 40th anniversary in the business. Last year should have been one big party to commemorate both anniversaries. Odd...

Quote from: "suspicious mind"
it is now universal motown something like that.i think the universal part being some type of investment group.apparently barry gordy wasn't very involved in the 50th anniversary activities.
so you guys haven't heard of anything either. i got intrigued by this over the weekend when at an amusement park near by. they have shows there and the them for one is motown 50th anniversary and i had thought it was strange that was the first i'd heard anything about such a big anniversary.
Title: Re: Why not The Jacksons instead of Jackson five?
Post by: YoungNewMJFan on May 19, 2010, 10:25:44 PM
Motown has/or had the rights to use "The Jackson Five" AND "The Jackson 5" so when they left Motown they had to change to "The Jacksons". The only way I can imagine them getting around it is, as mentioned earlier, they use the "Jack5ons" spelling or, also mentioned, the contract ran out.  :)
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal