You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
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.
It is a bit harder to prove, yes, but Activision's Music Supervisor and Licensing Coordinator actually sent Wayne Milligan from GN'R's licensing administrator an e-mail confirming the agreement. If that's true, it's more than just relying on proving a verbal discussion and agreement took place.
The SCOM issue is a different one altogether. Either Activision had a license to use that song, which means having Axl's consent to grant a license, or they didn't.
Ali
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
monkeychow wrote:^ 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
Yes. Damages would be determined after verdict. My point is, assuming the verdict was that activision breached the contract by associating Axl with Slash in violation of their contract, the court would then look at the harm resulting to Axl from the breach, in order to determine damages. It would be rather hard to quantify any loss and establish significant harm to Axl from the breach if Axl himself had created a public perception that he was still associated with Slash by appearing on stage with him on television at RRHOF.
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Ali wrote:monkeychow wrote:^ 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
Yes. Damages would be determined after verdict. My point is, assuming the verdict was that activision breached the contract by associating Axl with Slash in violation of their contract, the court would then look at the harm resulting to Axl from the breach, in order to determine damages. It would be rather hard to quantify any loss and establish significant harm to Axl from the breach if Axl himself had created a public perception that he was still associated with Slash by appearing on stage with him on television at RRHOF.
Perhaps, but you're assuming that the judge or jury would even consider that factor at all.
Ali
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Considering it would be utterly negligent of activision's lawyer not to bring it up - that's not much of an assumption.
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Not what I meant. I didn't mean whether or not it would be brought up. I meant whether or not it would be considered in a verdict and determination of damages. Especially in the case of a one-off reunion as opposed to an ongoing reunion - i.e. a tour.
Ali
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
In the hypothetical we were discussing it's clearly relevant but whatever, you can call it an assumption if you want!
No disrespect Ali, but I just hope you are a Jarmo type character whose posting style is influenced by actual rewards given to him by the organisation, because if you're just a regular fan like myself....then damn...can't you see the Stepford Wives nature of everything surrounding Axl?
Are you familiar with the wrestling term Kayfabe? That's what these online conversations are like to me, people seem to stick to their characters regardless of events, and will spin events whatever way to suit it.
Sorry if that sounds offensive, don't mean it as an attack, I just really am starting to find this whole situation bizarre overall.
- Intercourse
- Rep: 212
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
This boils back down to my point, whose fucking avatar would Axl have had in there instead..DJs?
Say that's what Activision did to shut Axl up and DJ's avatar was all over the game playing Jungle..would that represent some violation against Slash?
Is there any law against misprepesenting the image or likeness of a person who is legally recognised as the creator of a protected piece of work by subsituting the image or likeness of another over it?
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Internationally there is. The application of these laws in the USA is the subject of a lot of speculation.
Speaking globally though the the Berne convention gives artists a moral right of attribution that they would have to directly waive even in situations where they no longer own the other copyrights.
I think having DJ's avatar play original recordings made by Slash would likely contravene Slash's moral right to be associated as the performer of that sound recording. Although they could avoid this by recording a "sound alike" version where DJ is actually playing the solo like he does live. They'd still have to credit slash as a composer but that could be done in fine print credits or something I guess.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
However that said, I can see why Axl might be pissed here.
Slash was made a boss in the game, he was the cover art for the game, the whole thing was based around Slash and specifically what he did in GNR...which while accurate in terms of Slash's massive contribution to the GNR sound.....isn't in either Axl or Slash's interests in terms of it's potential to associate him with GNR.
Given these days Slash won't do GNR questions and only wants to talk about his new album. And Axl likes to act like modern GNR was always the GNR - eg "GNR returns to the Ritz" etc.
- Intercourse
- Rep: 212
Re: Axl Rose Gets Mixed Result at Hearing in 'Guitar Hero' Lawsuit
Thanks for the reply Monkey.
I'm not so sure that Slash doesn't want to be associated with GNR, he is afterall a partner in the old GNR company that still manages the back catalogue. Slash is just tired of Axl/feud questions.
Slash is savy, he knows that it will never do him harm to be known by new generations of kids that HE wrote riffs on Jungle and SCOM..GNR is the gateway to Slash's solo material.
I don't believe he is arrogant enough to believe that a 16 year old metal fan will get into his solo work first and move to GNR later.
As for Axl being pissed, well fuck him frankly. He's had 15 years to re-establish GNR without Slash. He should be 4 /5 albums up the road from Slash's last work which would make Slash's contribution about 20% of the total GNR catalogue and not 80% as it is today.
A video game is not at fault for Slash being continually dragged back to the GNR name, its the millions of fans who felt they never got all they deserved from Axl & Slash. Plus its the media who struggle to find anything interesting to write about modern music stars and still find that both men are compelling subjects to write about even after all of these years.
