You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
"Activision says Rose himself confirmed this by saying, "Unanimous approval by all three partners of GNR Music is required before any license to use Guns N' Roses music is given."
Axl and Activision are referring to the 1992 recording contract amendment where Slash-Duff-Axl formed a new partnership after Izzy and Steven left. Evidently, any music to be licensed from the old bands catalog has to be approved by all three....as Axl admitted here.
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Nirvana music is sort of in the same boat except it's Grohl-Novoselic-and Courtney Love.....threesomes and very strange bedfellows. I find so many similarities between Nirvana and original Gnr...some funny stuff. 
amazing they can get anything done with those nuts Rose and Love involved.:nervous:
- Me_Wise_Magic
- Rep: 70
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Nirvana music is sort of in the same boat except it's Grohl-Novoselic-and Courtney Love.....threesomes and very strange bedfellows. I find so many similarities between Nirvana and original Gnr...some funny stuff.
amazing they can get anything done with those nuts Rose and Love involved.:nervous:
That's a fucking headache in a nutshell!
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
^ Ali i agree with that...but would it speak as to the question of damages?
That is....say Activision are found to have legally misrepresented themselves to Axl that they wouldn't use Slash's likeness, or otherwise breached a contract with Axl because of their association with Slash.
Wouldn't the next stage to be to assertain what the appropriate damages are? Which would normally look at the harm resulting to Axl because of it right? And if Axl himself does something that binds him to slash much deeper....wouldn't there be an argument to say that although it's a nominal breach...activision shouldn't have to pay him much because there's no real loss to Axl?
I think the next step would be to present the arguments before and judge and/or jury. Then, if this goes to trial and a verdict, then it would be the point at which damages would be assessed and a monies awarded accordingly.
Ali
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Ali, I see what you are saying, I really do. However..
- There are 25 million copies of Slash playing WTTJ on AFD out there.
- There are thousands of hours of video in high street shops and on the
internet of Slash playing WTTJ.
- Slash continues to play the song regularly.
- You CANNOT change history or make people 'forget' Slash's
ownership of that riff no matter how much money you throw at this in
court or how bitchy and difficult you are with the RNRHOF, your
record label, your fans or Slash himself.Axl is getting one third of the royalties from Activision, the same amount of money as Slash gets. Slash did all the work on this and Axl still gets paid...ALOT
Here's a thought....why not, just for once, be GRACIOUS, thankful and just stop FUCKING ABOUT with this idiotic feud and get on with making great new music?
My take on things is that he's realised two things:
1. Him & his band won't top AFD and the UYIs
2. Slash won't do what Izzy & Duff did and go away / go low key.So, being wired up as he is, he's going to devote the rest of his life making tons of money off of those albums while at the same time spending lots of money & time trying to claim that glory for himself and rub his old partner out of his rightful place in history.
It aint going to work and it aint going to give us new music anytime soon. No court in the land can make the global recognition of Slash's contribution to GNR disappear.
And I understand what you're saying. However, none of that makes it so that there is no issue with Activision misrepresenting their intentions in order to get the consent for the song license. At the end of the day, an agreement is an agreement. And it doesn't make it o.k. for them to use SCOM in ads without securing a license for the song.
Thinking this is a worthwhile suit from a PR standpoint is a different issue altogether than whether or not there is just cause either legally or ethically to file a suit against Activision. I agree this may be a detrimental course of action from a PR standpoint.
Ali
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
the breach of contract is over Slash's image being used....Axl will allege he told them they could use Jungle however, no images of Slash were to be used. Activision used it allegedly against Axl's wishes so he is alleging they "breached their contract".....simple as that I think. It is about Slash...don't fool yourself. If it goes to trial it will be interesting.
Actually, there is another issue of SCOM being used in ads for the game without ever having obtained a license for the song. As far as "it is about Slash" thing. I get what people are saying that without the tension with Slash, this wouldn't be an issue. But, at the same time, hating Slash would not provide any basis for a suit. At least not one that didn't get thrown right out of court.
Ali
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Ali wrote:Whether or not Axl stood up on stage with Slash at the RRHOF or not would've been immaterial to the issue at the heart of the suit: Activision misrepresenting to Axl their intention to use Slash's image and likeness in GH III.
please.
there would not be a suit if axl didn't hate slash. that's the heart of the suit/matter/whatever BS.
& i mean maybe, just maybe, the guy has a reason for being so full of spite. but he's never justified it publicly so he just looks like a nut. & a broken record.
who gives a shit if acitivision told axl a little white lie? seriously?!
if axl had any balls he's fucking stop messing around chasing ever last dollar & make & release some fucking music. what is he, a business man or a musician? he's fucking wasting our time is what he's doing, it's the only thing he does a half decent job of anymore.
Who gives a shit? Of course, you don't. It doesn't have any impact on you or I at all. But, perhaps if it did, if someone you did business with lied to you in order to get you to acquiesce to their request, you may care. If they didn't get a proper license to use a song you co-wrote in an ad for their product, you may care.
Ali
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Well, clearly they did get a proper license or the game never would have come out. And clearly Axl wasn't so bent out of shape that he didn't cash his checks or refuse to negotiate with them for his own game. If someone lied to me and it mattered THAT much to me, I'm not cashing their checks, and I'm not negotiating with them for my own game.
If the contract clearly stated Slash would not be used, this wouldn't even be going to court. If Axl agreed to something with a stipulation that was that important to him without getting it in writing, that's on him. One thing Axl and his lawyers have proven over the years is that they know how to write contracts in his favor.
Sorry, I have a hard time feeling bad for Axl on this one. He did it to himself, and his reason for being upset is beyond ridiculous.
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Axl is arguing more of an oral contract violation....a bit harder to prove obviously. I would like it to go to trial just for pure entertainment value.
I know - that was my point. His lawyers can find a way for him to legally take the name of the band, but somehow miss adding one little line saying "no Slash" to a contract with GH knowing how important that one little issue is?
