• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Trump-Kennedy center sues artist for cancelling because of name change

Andy_Ross

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
66,778
What a surprise

Trump-Kennedy Center filing $1M lawsuit against musician who pulled out of Christmas Eve concert over name change

The jazz musician who abruptly backed out of hosting a Christmas Eve concert at the Trump-Kennedy Center will face a $1 million lawsuit for the “political stunt,” the head of the performing arts venue revealed Friday

 
What a surprise

Trump-Kennedy Center filing $1M lawsuit against musician who pulled out of Christmas Eve concert over name change

The jazz musician who abruptly backed out of hosting a Christmas Eve concert at the Trump-Kennedy Center will face a $1 million lawsuit for the “political stunt,” the head of the performing arts venue revealed Friday

This too shall be quickly dismissed.
 
What a surprise

Trump-Kennedy Center filing $1M lawsuit against musician who pulled out of Christmas Eve concert over name change

The jazz musician who abruptly backed out of hosting a Christmas Eve concert at the Trump-Kennedy Center will face a $1 million lawsuit for the “political stunt,” the head of the performing arts venue revealed Friday

They seem to be claiming both that the concert had “dismal ticket sales and lack of donor support” and that its cancellation has cost them a million dollars.
 
They seem to be claiming both that the concert had “dismal ticket sales and lack of donor support” and that its cancellation has cost them a million dollars.
The artist wasn't responsible for this, it was the idiot whose name has been added to the place.
 
What a surprise

Trump-Kennedy Center filing $1M lawsuit against musician who pulled out of Christmas Eve concert over name change

The jazz musician who abruptly backed out of hosting a Christmas Eve concert at the Trump-Kennedy Center will face a $1 million lawsuit for the “political stunt,” the head of the performing arts venue revealed Friday


So, a free concert, which by definition generates no revenue, cost the Kennedy Center a million dollarwhen it was cancelled???

Would AMBASSADOR Grenell actually risk filing such a lawsuit and risk having a court determine that the name change didn't have legal standing? Much less put up with the ill will that the lawsuit would generate?
 
So, a free concert, which by definition generates no revenue, cost the Kennedy Center a million dollarwhen it was cancelled???

Would AMBASSADOR Grenell actually risk filing such a lawsuit and risk having a court determine that the name change didn't have legal standing? Much less put up with the ill will that the lawsuit would generate?
"A million dollars" in regard to law suits is just a turn of phrase Trump uses to mean "retribution of some sort".
 
Would AMBASSADOR Grenell actually risk filing such a lawsuit and risk having a court determine that the name change didn't have legal standing? Much less put up with the ill will that the lawsuit would generate?
The outcome of the lawsuit won't depend on the importance of the name change. It will depend on the contract terms between the center and the artist. If the contract allows for withdrawal, the artist will win. If the contract does not, or not for this reason, Grenell will win.

We don't know the contract terms. They are not public, as far as I am aware.
 
The outcome of the lawsuit won't depend on the importance of the name change. It will depend on the contract terms between the center and the artist. If the contract allows for withdrawal, the artist will win. If the contract does not, or not for this reason, Grenell will win.

We don't know the contract terms. They are not public, as far as I am aware.
In England, the damages awarded would be on the basis of the loss incurred. How does it work in the U.S.? Is the plaintiff just allowed to name some arbitrary sum, or is reality allowed to insert itself?
 
The outcome of the lawsuit won't depend on the importance of the name change. It will depend on the contract terms between the center and the artist. If the contract allows for withdrawal, the artist will win. If the contract does not, or not for this reason, Grenell will win.
We don't know the contract terms. They are not public, as far as I am aware.

Whether the legality of the name change figures into the lawsuit outcome is something that I wouldn't know, but it would make AMBASSSDOR Grenell and the Kennedy Center board look pretty bad if a court were to determine that the name change was not legal, and might even generate public sympathy for the musicians.
 
So, a free concert, which by definition generates no revenue, cost the Kennedy Center a million dollarwhen it was cancelled???

Would AMBASSADOR Grenell actually risk filing such a lawsuit and risk having a court determine that the name change didn't have legal standing? Much less put up with the ill will that the lawsuit would generate?
Concession stand sales, of coarse. I hear popcorn is a real money maker.
 
I don't see how that issue would even come up in such a lawsuit, unless their contract has some clause related to the name. Which would be odd.
Richard Grenell, in a letter he signed as "President, The Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts", wrote this (with my highlighting):
Your decision to withdraw at the last moment—explicitly in response to the Center’s recent renaming , which honors President Trump’s extraordinary efforts to save this national treasure—is classic intolerance and very costly to a non-profit Arts institution.
Inasmuch as that was the second paragraph of Grenell's letter informing Mr Redd of the lawsuit (in paragraph 7), it is safe to say Richard Grenell believes the renaming to be relevant to the lawsuit.

You really are bad at this.
God damn, but you're bad at this.
Those comments would be entirely appropriate if we were to see a wannabe comedian
  1. try to tell a joke,
  2. but then have to explain it was just a joke,
  3. and then, when nobody laughed, feel compelled to explain why the joke was funny,
  4. and then, when the joke continued to fall flat even after its hilarity had been explained, berate those who still don't think the joke was funny.
 
Richard Grenell, in a letter he signed as "President, The Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts", wrote this (with my highlighting):

Inasmuch as that was the second paragraph of Grenell's letter informing Mr Redd of the lawsuit (in paragraph 7), it is safe to say Richard Grenell believes the renaming to be relevant to the lawsuit.
Your decision to withdraw at the last moment—explicitly in response to the Center’s recent renaming , which honors President Trump’s extraordinary efforts to save this national treasure—is classic intolerance and very costly to a non-profit Arts institution.

The simple fact that all of the performer's correspondence and legal documents were likely with the John F Kennedy Performing Arts Center as opposed to being with President Donald J Turd Performing Arts Center makes any contractual agreements questionable. But of course it depends on the language of the documents. Adding Trump's name changes everything. An artist might even be entitled to damages.
By adding the name Trump to the Arts Center they have sullied the brand. It went from being a prestigious brand that added to the pedigree of the artist to a brand that detracted from it. The board is responsible for this regrettable incident. Not the artist.

And it is totally fine if the artist is making a political statement. He has every right to do so. And as if the board wasn't making a political statement.
 
Last edited:
The simple fact that all of the performer's correspondence and legal documents were likely with the John F Kennedy Performing Arts Center as opposed to being with President Donald J Turd Performing Arts Center makes any contractual agreements questionable. But of course it depends on the language of the documents. Adding Trump's name changes everything. An artist might even be entitled to damages.
By adding the name Trump to the Arts Center they have sullied the brand. It went from being a prestigious brand that added to the pedigree of the artist to a brand that detracted from it. The board is responsible for this regrettable incident. Not the artist.

And it is totally fine if the artist is making a political statement. He has every right to do so. And as if the board wasn't making a political statement.
Usually a change of a name in a contract is not considered a material change, a company changing its name from the "1-2-3 company ltd" to "2-3-4 company ltd" changes nothing material to the contract. However in this case there is a clear material change caused by the change of the name, it changed the nature of the venue in such a way that the performer may never have signed a contract if it was named that when they signed the contract.
 
From Grenell's letter:
Your decision to withdraw at the last moment—explicitly in response to the Center’s recent renaming , which honors President Trump’s extraordinary efforts to save this national treasure—is classic intolerance and very costly to a non-profit Arts institution.
Do anybody know what the Kennedy Center needed to be saved from? Did Trump save it from DOGE?
 

Back
Top Bottom