[x] Piper's Animal

There's a band called Animal in the db, featuring Randy Piper from W.A.S.P.
[www.bandtoband.com] http://www.bandtoband.com/index.php?Page=Search&AlbumId=6372

That band has released a new album but there's a bit of a problem regarding the name of the band:
[www.distbox.com] http://www.distbox.com/shop/default.asp?artist=ANIMAL

As you can see, the logo of the band is the same as on the one in the db. However, the cover also says "Randy Piper's Animal". What do we do with this one? "Animal" or "Randy Piper's Animal"?

Previously we've deemed this a new band: see David Coverdale's Whitesnake / Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow. I believe this more sophisticated aliasing was up for discussion now. I favour a case by case basis and actually would more lean towards aliasing where the the member's name is added for later releases. That seems to me to indicate marketing rather than reinvention. That said we'd have to be careful because sometimes that style can be used to distinguish later versions of a band where legal arguments have split a band.

The fact that the logo and the site address both use "Animal" without "Randy Piper's" suggests to me that "Animal" is a perfectly legitimate name for the group. If the group name was really, truly "Randy Piper's Animal"< they wouldn't have just "Animal" as a logo on the same cover art, and as a T-shirt logo, etc.

Looks like a marketing thing to me.