wasted Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 I'm going with Nick on this one, he sounds like he knows the law. Axl was never going to get 20 mil but a settlement seems fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caught in a Coma Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 A company would not pay someone out of court after they won a decision. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 A company would not pay someone out of court after they won a decision.Sure they would. Depends on the circumstances. Perhaps settling with Axl would prove cheaper than the legal costs of the appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
double talkin jive mfkr Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) Nick83 is very ignorant of the law. He thinks Axl won this case and got paid millions. Let him be. We all know he's 100% wrong and delusional.Ok. Axl filed an appeal. He then voluntarily dismissed the appeal. What would the incentive be to dismiss your own appeal? How does one benefit from that?The worst thing that can happen when you file an appeal is that the appellate court makes a ruling on your appeal, and you lose. Then the case is over, unless you choose to appeal to the state Supreme Court. And so once you've spent the time and money, and have submitted your appeal, there is no point in voluntarily requesting its dismissal. The only incentive to do that would be that a deal has been made prior to the appellate court's ruling. Explain to me why Axl requested his own appeal be dismissed. because he fucking gave up and knows he'll lose so fuck paying more through the nose to lawyers and shitalso his heart has changed in regards to slash etc how could he forseebly continue on with this kind of hatred provided he's mended things entirely with a very important mutual friend being duffA company would not pay someone out of court after they won a decision.Sure they would. Depends on the circumstances. Perhaps settling with Axl would prove cheaper than the legal costs of the appeal. bull shit no matter settles on the imminent weak ass outcome of an appeal an appeal is a very weak motion and by no means indicates that the loser being axl has any chance at winning everyone has a fucking chance at an appealu guys are entirely misreading thishe gave upA company would not pay someone out of court after they won a decision.EXACTLY LOL its CLEAR He most likely pulled the appeal because with the open book, he's bleeding money through his attorneys. Plus, it was pretty hopeless.Activision is a billion dollar corporation. You really think they settled with little Axl Rose because he was appealing a ruling? Really?Yeah, sure. And Activision allows the Court to rule, and now has a precedent set allowing many other unhappy artists to sue the shit out of them etc? Look, you don't file a fucking appeal in a big case like this if you are going to lose. End of story. When you file an appeal, you let the appellate court decide. There's nothing to lose here that I can see. You don't dismiss the fucking appeal. Are you an attorney?Dude got paid in exchange for voluntarily dismissing his own appeal. End of story. And to the other clown that said his lawyers would have advised him not to go forward, but crazy Axl proceeded anyway. Doesn't work like that. You think attorneys will put themselves at risk for this sort of malpractice? No. Welcome to the real world. An appeal was filed. The work was done, the money paid. All that was left was an appellate decision. You don't back out at that point. If the appellate court remands the case back to the trial court, and there were risks or cost concerns about proceeding forward, that's when you dismiss your case. End of storyhahahhahahaha paid to dismiss appeal after he lost ya that makes perfect sense einstein thats like saying uh ya i got caught cheating by the teacher got expelled, appealed it, then they let me back in class cause they were afraid they'd be proven wrong Edited October 28, 2014 by double talkin jive mfkr 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
double talkin jive mfkr Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 activision is in a much more powerful position than axl no sweat to go 15 rounds axl is watching his money and is not stupid at this pointhe cut his losses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combos Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 This makes my blood boil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Didn't they cancel the game anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Just go ahead and sell the forum, or close down the GNR section. The level of discussion has become abysmal.Blood boiling if Axl didn't receive eleventy billion dollars, which of course he did so it's all good.spampost, spamfight, spampost 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) Yeah, sure. And Activision allows the Court to rule, and now has a precedent set allowing many other unhappy artists to sue the shit out of them etc?Nice slippery slope.Look, you don't file a fucking appeal in a big case like this if you are going to lose. End of story. Does the phrase "nothing to lose" sound familiar to you? It's a hail mary. That is until he finally realizes it's going to cost him more money than it's worth. When the costs of the suit become more than potential damage payouts, why continue?When you file an appeal, you let the appellate court decide. There's nothing to lose here that I can see. You don't dismiss the fucking appeal. Are you an attorney? Dismissing your appeal closes the books on the case. It gets your blood sucking attorneys out of your wallet. It's a decision made all of the time by guaranteed losers.Dude got paid in exchange for voluntarily dismissing his own appeal. End of story. Link?And to the other clown that said his lawyers would have advised him not to go forward, but crazy Axl proceeded anyway. Doesn't work like that. You think attorneys will put themselves at risk for this sort of malpractice? No. Welcome to the real world. Malpractice? WTF are you talking about in regards to that? Telling your client he's fighting a losing battle isn't malpractice. They advise and then do what he wants. Or they step down. Obviously, Axl wanted to bring this suit and wanted the appeal, regardless of his chances.An appeal was filed. The work was done, the money paid. All that was left was an appellate decision. You don't back out at that point. If the appellate court remands the case back to the trial court,You're believing what you WANT to believe without anything to back it up other than wishful thinking.and there were risks or cost concerns about proceeding forward, that's when you dismiss your case. End of storyNot end of story. In your wishful thinking, you are arguing against your own point. Why? Because you are saying Activision, after winning the ruling, decided to settle before the appeal was even decided upon. You're completely contradicting yourself. Edited October 28, 2014 by Rustycage 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 And if you want to argue about it like you have inside info, show something to back up the claim. You're going to great lengths to claim that Activision folded on a decision they previously won. Why? Simply because the appeal was dismissed? That's weak.No one here has even seen the emails. No story ends without any kind of information, bruh. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russel Nash Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 And if you want to argue about it like you have inside info, show something to back up the claim. You're going to great lengths to claim that Activision folded on a decision they previously won. Why? Simply because the appeal was dismissed? That's weak.No one here has even seen the emails. No story ends without any kind of information, bruh.just in case I am not a lawyer, i don't have profound knowledge about laws or pretend to have some.I read the first post and all i can gather was that Activision broke the deal with Axl. Then they wanted to settle by releasing Guitar Hero Chinese Democracy, that never happened, mainly i think cos nobody gives a fuck and especially for GH or CH at that period of time(3 years from the release of GH3).If Activision won this(i failed to see that info) why would they want to patch things up or even negotiate with Axl? It was a move to win time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Alright... Time to cool off guys. Rusty and I were able to discuss this topic without resorting to personal attacks. It can be done. So no more personal insults. All posts that have violated this forum rule (or include/respond to said insults) have been removed. Let's keep things civil (get it?), shall we? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) And if you want to argue about it like you have inside info, show something to back up the claim. You're going to great lengths to claim that Activision folded on a decision they previously won. Why? Simply because the appeal was dismissed? That's weak.No one here has even seen the emails. No story ends without any kind of information, bruh.just in case I am not a lawyer, i don't have profound knowledge about laws or pretend to have some.I read the first post and all i can gather was that Activision broke the deal with Axl. Then they wanted to settle by releasing Guitar Hero Chinese Democracy, that never happened, mainly i think cos nobody gives a fuck and especially for GH or CH at that period of time(3 years from the release of GH3).If Activision won this(i failed to see that info) why would they want to patch things up or even negotiate with Axl? It was a move to win time?There was no written agreement that back up Axl's claims over the Slash issue. That was apparently talked about in negotiations. It doesn't seem to be verified that it was in the contract.From what I gather, the Chinese Democracy edition(lol) was a supposed concession over the Slash issue and that's Axl's excuse for waiting so long.They won the ruling(off of a technicality) that Axl was appealing and that's my point. Axl had the mountain to climb and it was pretty steep. That's why I find it hard to agree with someone claiming, without basis, that Activision turned a 180 and paid Axl off without any reason to do so. It's just wishful thinking.Now, whether Axl had a chance to win the appeal and what could possibly be in the emails is up for grabs. It's not logical to me to immediately think Axl was going to win appeal and the case and also declare that Axl secretly won out of court and was paid off. All simply because he dropped the appeal?Also, to suggest that Activision waited until they got the ruling and Axl filed an appeal before they would settle is ridiculous and illogical. If they had any intention of settling out of court, they would have done so before it ever came public. They already took the worst of the situation(bad press). It's just wishful thinking. The winners don't just give in like that. Edited October 28, 2014 by Rustycage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 And if you want to argue about it like you have inside info, show something to back up the claim. You're going to great lengths to claim that Activision folded on a decision they previously won. Why? Simply because the appeal was dismissed? That's weak.No one here has even seen the emails. No story ends without any kind of information, bruh.I also heard that Axl actually "won" when he paid off Stephanie and Erin. It was reported that he paid them a combined 1.4 million dollars to drop their cases against him. But it turns out they actually paid him like a combined 75 million dollars so he wouldn't sue them for causing him emotional distress. Weird how the rock press didn't report that. Axl always wins, baby.Just ask Nick.He most likely pulled the appeal because with the open book, he's bleeding money through his attorneys. Plus, it was pretty hopeless.Activision is a billion dollar corporation. You really think they settled with little Axl Rose because he was appealing a ruling? Really?Most likely. That's the most logical scenario.I've found that most people outside of this forum - especially people who are successful in business - still bow down to the mighty Mr. Rose and his every wish.I'm with Mags. I bet Axl and Beta brought home close to a billion dollars from Activision. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russel Nash Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Axl's better call Saul.. well, no THAT Saul. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChineseIRS Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) What does it matter if he won or lost? Its not like any of us are winning or losing 20 million. No effect on my life at all. Edited October 28, 2014 by ChineseIRS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 It's not like Axl lost 20 millions. He just didn't win them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
double talkin jive mfkr Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) There are a lot of people with their heads up in their CULO"s on this forum - wow i think the only way i'll come back is when it's reunion time and laugh at all the other negatrons who said never cause when axl was still in a hissy fit he said not in this lifetime Edited October 28, 2014 by double talkin jive mfkr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFA Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 lol, isn't nick83 the same guy who said slash had a moral obligation to return a guitar he paid for or something batshit like that? Axl fans are so funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts