lonnie youngblood Saxophonist Lonnie Youngblood Suing Hendrix and Scorsese

Famed saxophonist [lastfm]Lonnie Youngblood[/lastfm] wants to prove a point with his lawsuit against guitar icon Jimi Hendrix’s estate, MCA Records and Oscar-winning director Martin Scorsese. 

Read on for details of his beef with the three figures.

Youngblood made a name for himself in the 60s recording a few songs with Jimi Hendrix and touring with [lastfm]James Brown[/lastfm] and [lastfm]Jackie Wilson[/lastfm], and he is seeking credit where credit is deserved.

In his claim against the figures, Youngblood is claiming the song he cowrote with Hendrix “Georgia Blues” was used in the 2003 compilation without his permission and wasn’t credited as a co-author.   

He is seeking lost income damages for the song’s use in Scorsese’s TV series Martin Scorsese Presents the Blues. He released the track on the Internet with a copyright in 2002 and refused a $3,000 offer to use the track from a Hendrix’s Estate lawyer.

“It’s the principle,” Youngblood told the AP. “I want my song back. They had no right to take my song.”

Youngblood and Hendrix first met in the mid 60s playing in the same New York club circuit, but their paths deviated after Hendrix’s profile grew.  Youngblood ran into the guitarist in the late 60s and Hendrix asked him to record the song as a thank you and pay back for performing with him before his success. 

lonnie youngblood Saxophonist Lonnie Youngblood Suing Hendrix and Scorsese

Youngblood states the song “Georgia Blues” even references his birthplace and age in the lyrics “I was born in Georgia 27 years ago.” But being seven years after its uncredited use, does Youngblood’s claim have any valid stake, or is it too little too late to file a suit?

Listen to the song below:

[Source: Rolling Stone]

Comments (4)
  1. Robert Watson says:

    I don’t blame Lonnie for suing Experience Hendrix. It’s about friggin’ time.

  2. lanzarishi says:

    I agree. He should be compensated. I want to know where the rest of the jams are! I heard they recorded over three days worth of material. Really good funk/blues!

  3. nick johnson says:

    Experience Hendrix LLC has NO rights whatsover. In the UK they sued Purple Haze Records Ltd for ONLY “Performer’s Rights” NOT Copyright, NOT recording rights and no other right, ONLY “Performer’s Rights”

    They knew they could not prove they owned the copyright or any other right bcause they know they can’t prove something they do not have.


    1: To claim Performer’s Rights Jimi Hendrix had to be a qualifying individual. That means a RESIDENT of the UK /EU or EEC. Jimi Hendrix was a RESIDENT of New York.

    Reed Wasson in letters to Sony and ASCAPO wrote before the litigation “As you are no doubt aware Jimi Hendrix was at all times a citizen and RESIDENT of the United States.

    The United States does not recognise “Performer’s Rights” and is NOT a signatory to the Rome Convention.

    Houston Reed Wasson and his UK Lawyer Patrick John Gardiner committed over 25 acts pf perjury, have deceived the Courts, are party to a fraud and have perverted the course of Justice. They last have recently been reported to Scotland Yard forn the above.

    Experience Hendrix LLC do not own copyright. Experience Hendrix LLC do not own recording rights, Experience Hendrix LLC can’t own performers rights as there is NO such right under US Law and so have NO rights. They do NOT exist.

    (2) They are NOT the successors in title as they fraudulently claim. Jimi Hendrix has a daughter, Tamika Laurice James Hendrix who under New York Intestate law is the successor in title to the estate of her father.

    The CEO of Experience Hendrix LLC is Genevieve Lisa Jinka who calls herself “Janie Hendrix”. Her mother was Japanese and her father and unkown German.

    James Al Hendrix is NOT proven with DNA to be the father of Jimi Hendrix. In a sworn affidavit he swore that Jimi Hendrix had NO children. He lied.

    If you want to know more then you are welcome to contact us.

    All the above is supported with legal documentation as is the real chain of title

  4. Nick says:

    Lonnie Youngblood should be ashamed of himself. Of course to do so, he would have to possess some shred of decency which might permit him to have a sense of shame. In addition the authors of this article should likewise be ashamed for not doing their homework and their research. If they had done so, they would have at least made some mention of the fact that Youngblood has been endlessly cranking out dubious misleadingly labled albums for decades (beginning virtually within months of Hendrix’ death and continuing up to this day) containing the same 1963/64 material repeatedly repackaged along with completely bogus material he knows to have no Hendrix involvement whatsoever and yet he still passes off as Hendrix recordings.

    Youngblood has already made abundantly more money off of Hendrix name than his minimal collaborations with the artist should ever reasonably have merited. He is just yet another in a pathetically long string of vultures pecking over the corpse of an icon to steal the scraps.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From K-EARTH 101

K-EARTH Surf Pig
28 Free Things To Do in L.A.
Totally 80s Friday Night

Listen Live