Glenn Danzig’s lawsuit against Jerry Only dismissed

According to recent reports, Glenn Danzig’s lawsuit against his former Misfits bandmate Jerry Only was dismissed from court last week. Danzig was suing Only for cutting him out of profits from Misfits merchandise sales and violating a contract the two signed in 1994, in which they agreed to share ownership of the band’s trademarks for merchandising purposes.

Central District of California Judge Gary Klausner apparently dismissed the case because Glenn “failed to allege which terms of the 1994 agreement Only actually breached.” Here’s a full run-down of exactly what happened, via Blabbermouth:

“On August 6, Judge Gary Klausner of the Central District of California tossed Danzig’s lawsuit out of court, writing that Danzig failed to allege which terms of the 1994 agreement Only actually breached. In the ruling, the judge noted that merchandise provision of the 1994 agreement grants each co-owner “of the name and trademarks of the MISFITS and logo(s) and artwork (including all artwork used on MISFITS releases for Slash, Caroline or Plan 9 Records) previously associated therewith. Each party shall retain exclusive ownership of any artwork created by that party and not previously utilized on MISFITS albums, merchandise or advertising.’ The provision also grants the ‘non-exclusive right to conduct merchandising and to exploit other rights relating to the use and exploitation of the name MISFITS.’ The provision ends by stating that ‘[Only] and Danzig will each retain 100% of what each earns from the exploitation of merchandising rights and neither [Only] nor [Danzig] has any obligation to account to the other for any revenues derived from the exploitation of merchandising or any other rights.’

“Deeming the allegations in the Complaint as true, the Court finds no alleged facts that constitute a breach of the merchandising provision. The Complaint expressly alleges that the designs at issue are co-owned by [Danzig] and [Only]. As to co-owned designs, the provision contemplates that [Only] has a non-exclusive right to merchandise products and otherwise exploit the designs. The provision also allows [Only] to retain 100% of earnings from such exploitation. The terms of the provision do not address any obligation regarding trademark registration or negotiations with individual retail merchandisers as to licensing. Moreover, in reviewing the other provisions contained in the 1994 Agreement, the Court also finds no other terms that govern the parties’ conduct as it pertains to trademarking and licensing.”

I have no idea what 95% of that shit means, aside from the part about Jerry getting to keep 100% of that sweet, sweet Misfits merch monay. Look out for the Misfits snuggie and coffee grinder set, coming soon to a Walmart near you!


Add Misfits to My Radar   Add to My Radar

7 Comments

Leave A Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.