dcdeb Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 MIKA’s legal battle against a Belgian reggae singer with the same name is turning into an epic. Last year Bizarre revealed the lesser-known Mika, took the colourful Brit Award winner to court to try to force him to change his name and stop him playing in her homeland. She claimed she registered the moniker in the 1980s. The Belgian Mika lost that battle – and now famous Mika is fighting back. The Grace Kelly singer and his record label Universal are now suing her for more than £20,000 for filing a “provocative and reckless lawsuit”. Meanwhile, the reggae songstress has already announced she’s thinking about filing a counterclaim at a civil court in Brussels. They’ve got to be taking the Mik . . . http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/article1036162.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
England Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 wow! really.. I didn't know that! great job MIKA! good thing you won!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Thanks deb. Hmmm...."provocative" meaning to provoke or "stir up". But this will just continue to "stir up" what he didn't want provoked to begin with... But hey, we're talking about The Sun here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xBillyBrownx Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Haha I was excited until I read it was The Sun:mf_rosetinted: But definitely thanks for sharing deb :thumb_yello: It was all a bit strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAK1 Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 MIKA’s legal battle against a Belgian reggae singer with the same name is turning into an epic. Last year Bizarre revealed the lesser-known Mika, took the colourful Brit Award winner to court to try to force him to change his name and stop him playing in her homeland. She claimed she registered the moniker in the 1980s. The Belgian Mika lost that battle – and now famous Mika is fighting back. The Grace Kelly singer and his record label Universal are now suing her for more than £20,000 for filing a “provocative and reckless lawsuit”. Meanwhile, the reggae songstress has already announced she’s thinking about filing a counterclaim at a civil court in Brussels. They’ve got to be taking the Mik . . . http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/article1036162.ece Didn't she drop the original suit and that's why Universal put in a claim to get their costs back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucy Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 MIKA’s legal battle against a Belgian reggae singer with the same name is turning into an epic. Last year Bizarre revealed the lesser-known Mika, took the colourful Brit Award winner to court to try to force him to change his name and stop him playing in her homeland. She claimed she registered the moniker in the 1980s. The Belgian Mika lost that battle – and now famous Mika is fighting back. The Grace Kelly singer and his record label Universal are now suing her for more than £20,000 for filing a “provocative and reckless lawsuit”. Meanwhile, the reggae songstress has already announced she’s thinking about filing a counterclaim at a civil court in Brussels. They’ve got to be taking the Mik . . . http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/article1036162.ece GOOD for him!!!! I bet she was a pain in the arse!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natmika Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Oh, this is old news, we knew this already.I think someone from The Sun is spying on us.Seriously:mf_rosetinted: Oh, sorry! I meant:newyear: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foalbaby14 Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 good job Mika!! its awsome that you are fighting for yourself:punk: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Mika (Penniman) needs to knock it off already. You won the right to use your name, now have a nice slice of humble pie and wash it down with a glass of stfu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauruslady Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 unbelieveable, this is STILL going on?! is suing her really the answer?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 To be honest, I don't know who's side I'm on. I mean... people have sued over stupider resemblances and won. Mika isn't even his real name, so that should have counted for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
findingmywords Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I'm glad Meeks won already! But is suing her maybe too far? I just hope it doesn't stir things up more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonjourMika1990 Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I knew Mika would fight back... it was ridiculous in the first place for that reggae "whatever" to make that claim. So, let her have a taste of her own medicine. I'm not in agreement with "an eye for an eye," mentality, but I trust Mika's judgment, and whatever he wants to do is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 What's this? A sleeping dog? Let's let it lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauruslady Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I'm glad Meeks won already! But is suing her maybe too far? I just hope it doesn't stir things up more... yeah suing is a bit...I dunno, just taking it a little too far, I mean didn't he win anyway?! is this just rumours or is it actually happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonjourMika1990 Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 What's this? A sleeping dog? Let's let it lie. look at his little feet:wub2: awwwww Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finkster Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Nice that he won, but is suing her really necessary? I don't think so.. But I'm not sure if I can believe everything I read from places like The Sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 look at his little feet:wub2: awwwww I like the way he looks like a ragdoll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcdeb Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 look at his little feet:wub2: awwwww It IS a pretty cute pic -- I'm a sucker for puppies. And fwiw, I've found in my RL that if you have a copyright, the law requires you to protect it "vigorously" -- that means, you can't just let it go. So I'm assuming that means, that since Mika won the first round against Belgian Mika, his attorneys feel the need to prove a point -- that MIKA is Mika's name, and his to do with as he wishes. Whether we agree with it or not, it might be the legally proper thing to do... so that Mika can keep on being MIKA. I'm just saying... dcdeb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
findingmywords Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 yeah suing is a bit...I dunno, just taking it a little too far, I mean didn't he win anyway?!is this just rumours or is it actually happening? Yeah, he won! But with Mika, I know he's stubborn, and I have a feeling that if someone messes with him, he wants to get back at them.. Maybe he's learned from past experiences. Coming from The Sun, we can't really be sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 It IS a pretty cute pic -- I'm a sucker for puppies. And fwiw, I've found in my RL that if you have a copyright, the law requires you to protect it "vigorously" -- that means, you can't just let it go. So I'm assuming that means, that since Mika won the first round against Belgian Mika, his attorneys feel the need to prove a point -- that MIKA is Mika's name, and his to do with as he wishes. Whether we agree with it or not, it might be the legally proper thing to do... so that Mika can keep on being MIKA. I'm just saying... dcdeb It's just weird because his name isn't even Mika. That would be like my trademarking the name Catalina, going up against a celebrity who's name really WAS Catalina, WINNING, and countersuing to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcdeb Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 It's just weird because his name isn't even Mika. That would be like my trademarking the name Catalina, going up against a celebrity who's name really WAS Catalina, WINNING, and countersuing to make a point. Well, I think it's a little different than that, Sarie. As far as I can tell, it's more his name than it was hers -- I can't find an article about it now, but if I recall correctly from the first articles about this lawsuit, I don't think Mika is her name at all. It is at least the name he's been called for years (even if his birth name is really Michael)... dcdeb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tauruslady Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 Yeah, he won! But with Mika, I know he's stubborn, and I have a feeling that if someone messes with him, he wants to get back at them.. Maybe he's learned from past experiences.Coming from The Sun, we can't really be sure... yeah, I'm just surprised that him or his management want to sue...its just a bit disheartening since they alreay won... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackViolet Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 I'm pretty sure it's Universal more than him who's suing, in order to recoup costs, as stated. I agree that at first blush it seems excessive to sue back, but imagine if someone sued you for something like that--even if you won, you still had to pay hefty lawyer fees just to defend yourself. I think they're basically trying to break even, for costs and damages? On the other hand, Universal could probably afford the lawsuit, so maybe they should just let it go. Now what would be really harsh is if they sued her to prevent her from using the name Mika. But then they'd probably lose. --Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcdeb Posted April 14, 2008 Author Share Posted April 14, 2008 yeah, I'm just surprised that him or his management want to sue...its just a bit disheartening since they alreay won... You have to put it into perspective -- it's not a matter of *wanting* to sue. Sometimes legally you have to do things to uphold your trademark or copyright... you have to protect your interests. I did find on Belgian Mika's site that her name is really Sophie Michalakoudis... and she registered the name Mika in the '80s... which means she's had 20+ years to make a name for herself. And she argues that MIKA is hurting her career now? dcdeb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now