As would be expected, the original "Wyrd Sisters" are being portrayed as unreasonable, gold digging, unknowns by Potter, Radiohead, and Pulp fans amongst others, but are their portrayals justified? Not according to the band, who've posted a statement on their website quoting a Warner Bros. lawyer who had approached them about the use of their moniker...
Things are...errr... interesting around here. Okay, maybe interesting is not the right word. Terrifying would be closer. It all started with a phone call recently from a Warner bros lawyer. The fellow said: "We're making a big movie and putting together a band of famous musicians together called the Wyrd Sisters. We're going to make a big splash, sound tracks, the whole shebang! So... you don't want our army of lawyers shutting down your girls' band... sign this piece of paper and we'll give you $5000.
Here's the way it is. We said no. It is our name. We own it. We're not about to be threatened into giving up our name. And Warner Bros has no business making a movie with a band with our name in it without at least some simple courtesy. All kinds of untrue things are circulating about our situation, but I am unfortunately unable to publicly discuss anything at this point. Suffice it to say that we didn't go looking for Warner...they came looking for us. - The Wyrd Sisters
WB later offered $50,000 to the band to "share" its name, but that too was refused, and in my mind, the band's decision was justified. Is $50,000 a reasonable price tag to place on a brand you've invested 15 years of your life towards building, not to mention the financial investment? Let's see...$50,000 divided between three members, divided by 15 years, comes to a grand total of $1,100.00 per year each. With four albums, and two Juno nominations (which happen to bear their name) to their credit, I'd say they're worth a bit more than what a WB exec. probably spends on an average business dinner.
My advice to The Wyrd Sisters.....Change your name to 'The Harry Potter Trio.' I'm sure they wouldn't mind "sharing".... AOL-Time Warner threatens children running Harry Potter fan sites
Oh, and the band happens to be pretty darn good. Check them out.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dawn
Doesn't Warner Bros. have an obligation to check for any conflicts before deciding to use a name that might already be taken?
That said, they should be happy to have the exposure, however it comes.
2 - J. Gibson
Thanks, Annie - can't say I've seen too many positive reactions to this whole thing...suffice to say I agree with you!
We'll see what happens...
J.
3 - LegendaryMonkey
What a trip... I can't imagine why WB would even change the name in the first place!
4 - Maines
The band is hardly justified; Shakespeare invented that name centuries ago. They do not own it.
5 - X
Wonder what would happen if Terry Pratchett caught wind of any of this...
6 - Annie
Actually, Shakespeare's witches we called "The Weird Sisters", not "Wyrd". It's all in the spelling. :)
Dawn, I'm sure that WB DO, do copyright searches as standard practice. The issue seems to be how they deal with the conflicts once they find them.
I wonder if their threats, and 5000.00 pay offs usually do the trick? Probably.
Not that it matters, but I'd like to know when they started using the name, before, or after the band said "no". Either way, it seems to be a clear cut case of infringement...At least until the high priced WB lawyers get involved.
Good point X. The spelling is the same, but being that they're books, it's not a direct conflict.
Thanks, J, and you're welcome. Unfortunately for TWS they have their hands tied as far as telling their side of the story. Are you affiliated with the band?
7 - Diego
-They're suing for $40 million plus damages. This means that their name is worth $40 million, and that their business will be damaged beyond the use of their name. Both of these ideas are blatant falsehoods. The only reason for this ridiculous monetary demand is greed.
-They are trying to block the film from being circulated in Canada. This is an assault on free speech, and free speech is one of those ideals that applies just as much to big evil media conglomerates as to anybody. Suppressing free speech is the act of a tyrant, and since they claim to be defending free speech, it doesn't take a genius to spot the hypocrisy here.
-They are NOT just suing the big evil conglomerate. If they were just going after AOL Time Warner, I would be a lot more sympathetic. They are suing Jonny, Phil, and Jarvis as individuals, forcing them to defend themselves in court and putting a stop to their artistic and charitable work. This is EXACTLY what the Wyrds are accusing JP&J of doing to them; this makes their hypocrisy even clearer.
-The only conceivable benefit to the Wyrds from suing the individual artists is to increase their publicity. This makes them media whores. I do not use the word in a mean-spirited sense; there is no better term for people who will abandon their own professed principles to have people pay attention to them.
-All the Wyrd Sisters' recording and touring activity has been suspended, causing at least one member to leave the band. This proves that the woman in charge cares more about the lawsuit than the creation of music and the integrity of her group.
8 - Catherine
In reply to X, I have to say that when people say 'Wyrd Sisters', I hear 'Terry Pratchett'. Always have done, always will.
9 - Sigma9
The problem for the Wyrd sisters is that if they play a gig now, most people will think they are ripping off the name from Harry Potter. They might not be the band people are expecting to see.
The name (with either spelling) predates Shakespeare by at least a few centuries. I'm guessing that all uses of the name (including Terry Pratchett) go back at least this far... This from cbcunlocked.com:
The band took its name from three Norse sister-goddesses of fate who are called either The Norns or The Wyrd Sisters. The Wyrd Sisters were first recorded in Canada by the CBC in 1990. A member of their group is a CBC employee.
References to the "weird sisters" originally come from the name of an ancient pre-Christian goddess. The Holy Trinity later replaced this diety.
William Shakespeare referenced the triple goddess in Macbeth, in which three witches recite the incantation "Double double, toil and trouble." That phrase provided lyrics for a song used in the third Harry Potter film.
In 1996, there was also a TV movie based on a Terry Pratchett novel called, The Wyrd Sisters. J.K. Rowling's Goblet of Fire was published in 2000.
10 - Triniman
These ladies are from my home town and are fairly well known in the Canadian folk music community. I think they are in a win-win situation. They can justify the court injunction since WB did offer them some money, which they deemed to be not enough. And when they lose, they would have earned millions of dollars worth of free publicity and maybe would have sold hundreds more albums than otherwise.
I don't really agree with them, but I do believe they have not much to lose. And lots to gain.
11 - Stash
Man, talk about your desperate move to try and get free publicity. Wyrd Sisters on the move to the US scene riding the backs of Warner Bros. soon to be released film, "Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire". Be weary fans as there is a "Wyrd" attempt by the sisters of Canada. Now that we all know who the "Wyrd Sisters" are we can move on and ignore them even more as they disappoint more than their share of folk music fans in the US, well, if they had any at all. Some one get the stage hook and pull them away from the center stage, if you got your tomatos toss'em hard.
Might I add if the movie is banned in Canada only, I am sure the US welcomes the flow of money from all those Harry Potter fans up there :D.
Its too bad they had to go this route :( I mean Canadians are awsome....
12 - Kendra
well personally, I think it is kind of odd that WB would change the spelling of the name, however, there was a made for t.v movie released in 1996 called "the wyrd sisters" did this so called band sue them? no they didn't. so if they didn't think it was such a big deal to "own" their name then why do they now? could it be because Warner Brothers and Harry Potter have more money?? hhhmmm, points to ponder....Also I am now going to sue anyone that has my name, because I think I should own it.
13 - Starlit
Blocking the release will not change what has already been done. Blocking the release will not add to the confusion, as the band is NOT named in the movie. Blocking the release will simply infuriate Harry Potter fans that have been waiting patiently, hoping to see the masterpiece they've come to love put on to the screen. Result? Lots of free publicity when little children try and figure out why Harry Potter isn't available. The Harry Potter series is not about the Wierd Sisters, it is about Harry Potter. The Wierd Sisters were simply an afterthought, sprinkles to go on a cake. Heck, as a Terry Pratchet fan, I smile every time I see the phrase 'Wyrd Sisters'. I also don't see Mr. Pratchet getting any flack from these ladies from Manitoba.
I'm Canadian, and I've never heard to this band in my life. Even if I found them, afterwards, I wouldn't automatically assume they were affiliated with Harry Potter- a name's only a name after all.
It's a sad state of affairs when everyone is squabbling over a few syllables- and there are demands for 40 million for ownership.
14 - Triniman
The strangest thing, as Starlit has mentioned, is that the band name is not mentioned in the film. The ladies are after free publicity and no doubt, their management has led them to believe that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. They do lose some credibility, however, because they won't be able to block the film.
15 - Carly
Maybe the "Wyrd Sisters" should try to sue Shakespeare too, because he references 'weird sisters' there too.
Or maybe they should google their name and see how many other things come up with the same name as them..
Because this is all this is right? Protection of their bands name? Definitly not a grab for cash.
No, never.
16 - Matt
Even if Warner Bros did use this name, every movie or work of fiction has that disclaimer about any references or similarities to anyone in real life is purely coincidental and not the intention of the company, I say this band should just suck it up and realize that there are ALWAYS going to be duplicates, you dont see me suing the producers of the Freddy Krueger movies, since my last name is Krueger and I've had to go through a life of harrasment for it, why should this band be treated any different? Because they think they are famous? No way, suck it up and take a pill.
17 - JM
Carly hello! Shakespeare existed centuries ago before the "Wyrd Sisters" band formed. Anyways I think they're just trying to make a name for themselves by accusing Harry Pothead stealing their precious band title.
18 - kiva
I was a member of the Wyrd Sisters till mid-August this year.
I was not told of this impending law suit.
I am absolutely disgusted by what the remaining members are doing.
Since they have no 'current' pictures on their website (an odd exclusion at a time of seeking this scale of media hype), an ET Canada program flashed a picture from the archives, including myself and Nancy Reinhold, who left the band in 2003.
Kim's claims that this has caused them so much grief ($40 mil worth), that they had to cancel tours because of it, and postpone the release is so much bullshit. I would think that they'd at least need to find a replacement for me in the meantime. Unless they're just a duo now.
I feel I have been misrepresented, but I'm not about to sue anybody for big bucks. I'm not that type of person.
19 - Steph
Hi!
My name is Steph, I am Kim's niece, i just wanted to respond to Kiva first off..according to what i hear first hand you left the band on your own volition, seeking fame and fortune. So, don't whine!!(BTW, you have been replaced) Secondly, People are cattle... most everybody has bought into the "Harry Potter" franchise and all will see this movie. If the Wyrd Sisters come to town, chances are 85% of people will be delusioned and really not expect to hear some good 'ol homegrown folk music, no.... they will want Pulp and radiohead..or, like, some wizards or something...point being, my aunt has spent alot of time, effort and money establishing herself. This could ruin all that because a multi million dollar company needs to have it all! Way to pick on the little guy!
20 - Colleen
Hey Steph, only people in the band know what really happened, no matter what the 'family' story is. So maybe you should mind your own business and let your aunt stick up for herself. I mean it's not like she's working right now is she? And I seriously doubt that anyone has (in my home country of Canada) put in $40 million dollars of their own time and money into their job. Especially not Folk singers. I have never heard of them, and they've only been NOMINATED twice in 15 years. They never won. Bit harsh, but all facts.
Oh and before I forget, Diego (#7) couldn't have put it better.
21 - Steph
Dear, sweet, colleen.... This has been made the business of all harry potter fans and all wyrd sister fans, im simply trying to make the facts known... and Kimberly has stood her ground a thousand times over. Honestly, i think 40 million dollars is an ubsurd amount of money...
btw she IS in fact working, and touring...and just because you havnt ever heard of them doesnt mean anything, oh and BTW..how many junos have you been nominated for????
22 - Colleen
Oh but because I haven't heard of them DOES mean so much. If you're famous and from Canada, Canadians generally know who you are.
Besides arguments that EVERYONE knew that WB used the name Wyrd Sisters for the movie band is just not true. everyone knows about it because of this attempt to sue. If they wanted people to know, they made sure of it by their actions (legal and otherwise).
"oh and BTW..." considering I'm not in the music business, it would be pretty silly if I won any Junos wouldn't it?
And before I forget 'Moo'. Please give people a little more credit, very few people are going to buy a ticket to a band they think is from the Harry Potter movie. They will see posters of your aunt and her group mates and realize that they are not the same thing. Do the posters not say Folk music?
23 - steph
alright Ms. colleen....
first of all, posters do not generally state the genre of music right on it..."come and see eminem, oh ya hes a rapper..." no wait..." tonight, Metallica, they play metal..", so thats just silly..secondly, i assumed that you were NOT in the music biz...if you cant tell sarcasm by now....next, there are TONS of underground, indy, folk, whatever...canadian bands that i KNOW you have not heard of, and again..just because YOU of all people havnt heard of them means squat, theres what 33 million people in canada? and last but not least..MOO!!(may i now remind you of oh, Y2K,..buy this!, buy that! this is "in", this is "out" bla bla bla)...so your honestly trying to tell me that people are not cattle? anyway, it seems that we've strayed off topic, and are more interested in pointing fingers, I don't even talk to my aunt, so im trying to stay fairly unbias. So i'll leave you with this...May the best (wo)man win.
24 - gypsyman
Once long ago I helped run a theatre company. We named it and proceeded happily for a couple of years until we got some publicity. Shortly after we received a letter from lawyers representing another theatre company telling us to cease and desist using our name becuase it was only one word different from their name.
We had of course done a name search prior to our forming a business and had not come up with any conflict, but it didn't seem to matter in the eyes of lawyers or the law. The contention is confusion in the eyes of the public.
Now in the upcoming movie the name of the band is never mentioned...how then was the public's attention brought to this possible conflict with an existing band? Will the movie cause the conflict or will the publicity surrounding the case cause the confusion in the minds of the fans.
Why did they not go after Ms. Rowling in the first place. When I read the book, I said hey that's neat there is a band in Canada with the same name. I didn't realise they spelt it differntly. But according to the law that should be irrelevant because it's the confusion generated that matters.
Choosing to go after only Warner Bros. and not Ms. Rowling in the first places makes their case and point very weak...of course who wants to go after a children's author, wait until the movie comes out when you can get much more money.
Sorry I join the forces who see this as a cynical ploy for money and publicity by a band with not much of a public following, even in Canada. Winning a Juno award really has no bareing on your popularity in this country.
If Warner Bros. lawyers are any good this shouldn't get past the prelim. stage before the judge throws it out of court and the womyn end up with a bill for court costs.
25 - Colleen
Dear Steph, when I said 'say Folk music' I didn't mean the words literally, what I meant is anyone who saw their posters or CD covers would be pretty stupid to think they were a punk rock band.
I can tell when sarcasm is used, and I know you were not serious about winning Juno's. Neither was I, I too was being sarcastic. And was there a hint of a threat in your statment? It could be taken that way you know, with your use of the ellipsis.
Again, maybe I should explain myself clearly, because other people do not seem to be able to follow a thought beyond the written words (this is not directed personally at Steph, I assume though since you did not know what I meant, others must not have as well). When I say I have never heard of them, and this matters, it is because they are not so popular that nearly everyone (in Canada) knows of them, or is proud that they are/were Canadian. Think Bret Hart, Bryan Adams, Terry Fox. As I said before, I (and many other people) have only heard of the band because of this lawsuit. And I'm not a Harry Potter fanatic. I've read the books, but I've read better, and seen the movies, but seen better.
Even if they didn't do it for the publicity, they would have to be pretty thick to not know they would get a lot of it. And I doubt that they are, you can not make it in many businesses (maybe especially the music business), if you are that dense. I do apprieciate that your aunt and the band have worked hard, and although I have not listened to any of their songs, I'm sure they must be able to sing, as they have lasted 15 years, maybe different members, doesn't really matter.
But I do wonder if they are aware that few people are going to say, 'hey, that's the band that tried to delay the Harry Potter movie, let's listen to their music.' They will get very little good attention, and have gotten a lot of bad already.
The Y2K thing, people were scared that they might lose everything they worked for. Sounds like your aunt maybe? Yes people do buy the same things generally, and like the same things genaerally, but you can't say that we're cattle. We generally all like the same things, because we are generally brought up the same way (which affects our tastes). Generally we watched cartoons when we were young, and generally we have fond memories of them. Generally we like to be in style, have modern conviences, etc. Movies/books/music/whatever are popular because people like (for example) the movie , and they become more popular because people think, 'hey this movie is popular, I'll go see what all the fuss is about.'
Yes people respond to ads and want what is shown, but this isn't because people are told HOW to respond, it's because ad companies know what people resond TO.
Now you're certainly right, most of that is off topic. But if you mind explaining that last comment (sentence), I'm not quite sure of what you were trying to say. To clarify, I am being serious here, and I'm not saying that you can't explain what you mean, or that your an idiot and don't know how to talk. What I am saying is that I can take what you have said in a few different ways, and I'm not sure which you meant.