No lawsuit over Beatles credits

" It's not demeaning John, it's not taking anything away from John "
Geoff Baker
Sir Paul's spokesman

Ono was reported to be considering legal action after Sir Paul reversed the traditional "Lennon-McCartney" credit on a new live album.

But Ono's lawyer Peter Shukat said: "I don't think anybody ever said Yoko was going to sue Paul."

He declined to comment further.

Earlier, Sir Paul's spokesman Geoff Baker dismissed reports of possible legal action.

"Have we had any legal letters? Absolutely not, it's not true. I don't know whether she [Ono] is happy about it or not, but there can't be any legal action."

Ono and McCartney both have an equal share in Apple Records, Mr Baker said, and one member would not sue another.

Sir Paul decided to switch the names for the 19 Beatles songs on his new album Back in the US to rectify the historical imbalance, Mr Baker said.

Sir Paul and Lennon agreed in 1962 that the names could be arranged in any order, Mr Baker said.

"It's not demeaning John, it's not taking anything away from John, it's merely pointing out who did the body of work on certain songs, just so people know."

Back in the US, released in November, was recorded on Sir Paul's recent US tour and the Beatles songs are credited to "Paul McCartney and John Lennon".

The Los Angeles Times had quoted Mr Shukat, as saying Sir Paul's move was "ridiculous, absurd and petty".

Lennon tribute

The paper also said Ono was "looking into" legal action.

Sir Paul has switched the credits before, on a 1976 Wings live album, but left the traditional order in place on a later concert recording.

The Back in the US album also includes a song Sir Paul wrote in tribute to Lennon, Here Today, which he says reminds him "why we loved each other so much in the Beatles".

The double-CD set went to number eight in the US charts, and the tour was one of the most successful of the year, making more than $2m (£1.25m) per show.