auntblabby wrote:
what about "spring brucesteen"? surely that capitalist versifier hadn't thought of
that. yet.

Seriously (I know you were only joking, but believe it or not, people do sometime consider doing things like that, and it interests me). It isn't an issue of whether Bruce or his lawyers had already thought of and "locked up" any possible alternate versions of his name. I doubt they trademarked anything but his name.
If a band called themselves Spruce Bringsteen or Bring Sprucesteen, and never made it out of whatever hole in the wall town they played in, probably nothing would come of it. If they suddenly had a album that hit the charts, his lawyers might pay more attention.
There was a band in Canada recently called One I'd Trouser. They'd been using the name for years. They had one single that brought them enough recognition, and that started selling in the States to catch the attention of another band already using the name. Apparently where was a small settlement paid, and they changed their name eventually to The Trews.
Here's the funny thing though. Googe the band name, and there's nothing, zero, zip, nada about the other band anywhere. If a completly unknown band can force the hand of another band doing better than themselves, just because they got to it first, I'm sure BS could, if he wanted to, force bands using any form of his name to quit doing so if he wanted to.
It's all about rep. Sometimes the original artist doesn't give a crap, sometimes they do.
It's a litigious society we live in. If somebody with enough money doesn't like what you're doing and wants to stop you bad enough, they'll try.
_________________
I'm not likely to be around much longer. As before when I first signed up here years ago, I'm finding that after a long hiatus, and after only a few days back on here, I'm spending way too much time here again already. So I'm requesting my account be locked, banned or whatever. It's just time. Until then, well, I dunno...