The Rutles

[Rod Serling]

Is it true, or just an urban myth, that Neil Innes, the composer of all The Rultles songs, has never taken a penny in royalties for their very succesful reaeases, in fear of being sued by The Beatles themselves, Apple, Parlophone, Northern Songs or any other Beatles connected factions?

[andy-hughes]

I don;t know as a fact, but i would suggest that The Beatles would see The Rutles as an affectionate tribute, which is a world away from a money-making rip off. Remember, George Harrison was involved in the original film, which is surely a measure of how he, and the band, saw the whole enterprise.

Legally, you can't sue someone for an approximation, visual or musical, otherwise The Bee Gees and Leo Sayer, and maybe even The Nolans would have The Scissor Sisters in their gun sites as I write!

I think this is the kind of urban myth that crops up regularly in msuci, and the world at large.

Next week - Bob Holness did not in fact play the sax. on 'Baker Street' - full expose here!

[Backdrifter]

Rod, the truth is more something along the lines of this. The music wing of ATV, who owned the Rutles film, released all publishing rights because THEY were jittery about being sued. Yes it was an affectionate parody but it had a spin-off LP and is now on dvd and I don't think Innes would have turned his nose up at royalties. He's spoken about this in interviews and is a bit bitter that the company basically removed his chances of earning from the Rutles, when it was unlikely they would have been sued.