Comments on: “Did litigation kill the Beatles?”

By: Curt Bourque

Curt Bourque — Mon, 09 May 2016 02:19:49 +0000

Yoko was a contributor with her constant presence in the recording studio. But business was the final blow with Apple lacking a strong leader Klein was brought in against Paul’s desires. Paul was proven right to the other 3 but not until after the breakup.

PS Ringo George and John left the Beatles before Paul did, and John was not a beatle for those last six months but agreed to keep it quiet to his later regret.

By: MattS

MattS — Fri, 06 May 2016 20:42:42 +0000

In reply to Roger Bournival. I blame the record labels. They tried to replicate the Beatles' success with label built bands and failed, so they set out to destroy the Beatles /conspiracy theory

By: Steven Jones

Steven Jones — Fri, 06 May 2016 20:07:58 +0000

Yoko Ono didn’t break up the Beatles, the Beatles did. They broke up for the same reason they were successful, they were innovators interested in trying new things.

Brian Epstein was like the glue that held the band together. Once he was out of the picture, nature took its course.

By: Roger Bournival

Roger Bournival — Fri, 06 May 2016 16:20:38 +0000

I blame Yoko Ono!

By: Hugo S Cunningham

Hugo S Cunningham — Fri, 06 May 2016 15:55:07 +0000

Part of their legal vulnerability may have involved attempts to avoid Britain’s 90% income tax brackets of that era.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 06 May 2016 14:06:41 +0000

It does appear that the Fab four, like a lot of other bands, had poor management, and possibly poor legal representation. Nevertheless, the real reason why they were sued so much, and found it necessary to sue so much, is because they were making money.

Money attracts litigation. That, I guess, would be the point from the “overlawyered” point of view.