Those two bits of news would be interesting enough on their own accounts - after all who doesn't like the idea of (as much as can be mustered of) classic RATT touring again, and who isn't happy to see the group name reverting back to more of the original members - but there's also a philosophical issue raised by all of this as well.
Who is the "real RATT" in this case? Pearcy, DeMartini, and Croucier? Or Blotzer? Both? Neither? Or if we think about it more generally - when a band splits up, and multiple members lay claim to the band's name, who should we consider to be the band?
