PatrickS77

51 minutes ago, Gunner Gilby said:

Cliff doesn't want to tour endlessly if it's going to be an ongoing thing. However I think if it was a farewell tour and he knew there was an end to it in sight it might be different.

It's a 3 months tour. It's not just a couple of shows. Most likely there will also be a US tour and an australian tour. He also said that he has physical problems. So maybe it is not really his choice anymore.

1 minute ago, Gunner Gilby said:

Presumably if this was going to be their last lot of shows ever Cliff would've been persuaded to stick around. With Phil I suspect it's different. He presumably has visa issues due to his criminal record which I'm guessing are stopping him taking part. They should've just asked (or never gotten rid of for the second time) Chris Slade. Sounds like even after his stroke a while back he still plays great.

Cliff doesn't want to tour. He gave his last show notice at Power trip. And well, older drummers are always been shit on. Ask Bill Ward, ask Joey Kramer. They probably don't have faith in him that he can do a full tour.

11 minutes ago, Gunner Gilby said:

No. Being a GN'R fan the irony isn't lost on me. I chose to go and see Guns in 07 knowing it was just Axl n Dizzy with a totally different band. I went and just enjoyed it for what it was. That and I was curious to hear the then new and (officially) unreleased songs live. 

Well, and people go and are excited because this could be the last time seeing that band.

48 minutes ago, Gunner Gilby said:

Genuine question. Is anyone really excited about seeing this line up? Brian God bless him can't sing like he used too. Stevie's only been there all of two albums and is no Malcolm, the drummer and bassist however talented they may be are substitutes and Angus is the only original member.

I mean 2016 wasn't perfect either. But you had Chris Slade returning and Axl filling in was something of a novelty which worked surprisingly well. This just reeks of a cash grab. Sure GN'R's tours are cash grab too. But at least you've got Axl, Slash, Duff n Dizzy.

Ironic coming from a GNR fan. Have you forgot 2002 to 2014? The main person and show at this point is Angus. The second most important person is Brian, doesn't matter if he's not as good as he once was. The people who are not the event fans that fill the stadiums would also want to see Malcolm, but obviously that's not possible.

17 minutes ago, Gavin82 said:

Is it easy enough to get from Munich central St to Airport at like 7am says public transport takes 90 mins ? can someone local correct me 

My Hotel is a few mins walk from central St

Google is your friend. S-Bahn S1 or S8 around 45 minutes.

59 minutes ago, adamsapple said:

Dates are coming a little too late.

Venues suck. Stadiums and fields only.

Most EU shows in Germany. Only one show in the Netherlands.

Lineup still uncertain, likely no Phil and no Cliff, just Angus and Brian plus replacements. 

Ticket prices likely an arm and a leg if you actually want to see them with your own eyes and not just on a screen.

Hope it's gonna be great last tour and everyone's having fun but I'll pass.

Huh? What else did you expect? It's summer. They always do stadiums and fields in the summer. Line up is very certain:

We are thrilled to finally announce the ‘POWER UP’ European Tour.
Angus, Brian, Stevie, and Matt will be joined by Chris Chaney to carry the torch for Cliff. The tour will see us play shows across Germany, Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, England, Slovakia, Belgium, France & Ireland this Summer. We can't wait to see you all out there. Tickets on sale Feb 16.

Ticket prices most likely will be expensive, but still way cheaper than what most other high profile acts charge.

17 hours ago, traddfolks said:

Looks like Kat wished Del James a happy birthday on Instagram today

And when she was introduced at the auction of one of her pics at Steven Tyler's Grammy fundraiser party, no mention that she had her breakthrough photographing Guns N Roses (or shot them at all).

https://www.instagram.com/stories/katbenzova_rockphoto/3296333722541716702?utm_source=ig_story_item_share&igsh=MXZtdGttZXJ4eWhjbg==

51 minutes ago, AtlasShrugged said:

Yeah but the character he is playing is himself. 
 

Anyway, he’s changed dramatically as 2021’s release “pussy full of maggots” shows 👌

But he wrote the lyrics in 2002 (?).

On 12/31/2023 at 12:22 AM, DoMw94 said:

People here love to shit on Fernando/Team Brazil (speaking purely about band management here, nothing else), but just how involved in the important side of the business are they?

Guns N' Roses have been on Rod MacSween's roster for a long time, alongside other comparable 'legacy' acts (and Duff as a solo artist). I'd say he'd be more involved in meaningful decisions involving the band/business as a whole.

https://www.itb.co.uk/agent/rod-macsween

So what's the deal here? Who does what? How important are Team Brazil/Fernando etc?

He's a booking agent for events outside the USA. If you want to organize a concert and want GNR to play, you go through him. That's the extent of his importance. And then most likely it goes through Team Brazil as the direct artist representation (so Axl doesn't have to communicate himself) to confirm whether they want to do the event and whatever else they need from it. Though, logic dictates that word comes from Team Brazil first, that Axl/GNR is looking to embark on a tour and then the enquiries go through the booking agents.

12 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Laughable. The man always moaning about people not accepting personal preferences is giving out about peoples personal preference🤣 Absurd.

Aww, the butthurt loser still on a personal vendetta. Now that is laughable.

21 hours ago, bmus1 said:

People want their favorite band to sound good for an entire show.

They do sound good enough for most people attending shows.

2 hours ago, justynius said:

It seems most of this was done very unprofessionally so who knows what the actual contractual language says, but the photographer would typically retain ownership/copyright to the work and the employer would be granted authorization for specific uses. So, for example, GN'R could use the photographs for their website or advertisements but they could not use them in a pornography video or political propaganda. Either way, ownership of the photographs is inconsequential to GN'R outside of the distribution rights which could be controlled simply with a well written contract. In my view, it would be foolish to go to battle over these petty photography issues and still lose the war due to the mountains of evidence on the more serious harassment allegations.

Well, ownership would be consequential to GNR if they have to ask Kat for permission to do anything with the photos, outside the website or if she has the right to veto whatever they want to do with it. Or if Kat wants to do something with their images, without having to ask them. Whether they want to use it for a pornography video or political propaganda (really??) should be inconsequential to the photographer, as the persons in the picture gets associated supporting that. Not the photgrapher.

5 hours ago, Spiritual_Chaos said:

Do you have any experience in hiring and writing contracts with photographers regarding relesisng and having ownerships photographs?

Do you have any experience in that field?

Nope, I don't. Never claimed I have. But how is that relevant?? Anyone paying someone to be there for “364 shows or 30 ‘legs’” and have them make photos on their dime and time and then ending up not owning the photos and the photographer having sole ownership, is a fucking idiot. Period.

It would be a different story if the photographer would do that on their own dime (paying for travelling and accomodation and time spent to be there to make the photos themselves), then they should keep ownership and charge (and keep control of) for every photo the client wants to use (just like maybe in Jarmo's case, who wasn't hired as a photographer and only does it as a hobby, though I guess, he never has been given express permission to take photos either and also is doing it on GNR's dime, as in during the different job they pay him for, so I guess that's a grey area there).

Either it's one or the other, but both (getting everything paid AND keeping ownership of the photos), is just wrong. What is in it for the band? They might as well buy photos from local photographers or fans. And I don't give a flying fuck what a law, which may be different in any given country, says.

13 hours ago, justynius said:

It directly says in the lawsuit that there were no written contracts. Unless/until we hear otherwise, there's no reason to suspect this is false. Employment alone does not permit unauthorized/uncredited use, and there would need to be very specific contractual language for her to fully relinquish ownership and especially authorship.

Ultimately, the financial value of the photographs is almost certainly insignificant to GN'R; ownership only matters in that it grants them control over distribution. You don't need ownership for that, they can easily reach an agreement over distribution authorization with a valid written agreement. Then Kat needs to comply with those terms or it is them suing her. Work out these petty issues with the photographs and the real dynamite - the harassment allegations - go away.

There was a contract in the beginning that states that GNR is the owner. Why would anyone assume they would suddenly give her ownership? Her continued work is just a continuation of what was originally agreed in written form. Of course it is dumb on GNR's part to not have a contract. I guess that's where Fernando's "but you're family" comes into play. In fact, they are not family. And really, not giving her credit (as in mentioning who took the pic is one thing), claiming there is unauthorized use, when they paid her to do the photos and gave her unprecedented access to do so, is another. But we do seem to agree that the harassment issue was thrown in there to have more leverage against them to make them settle.

2 hours ago, justynius said:

She also waited until after the tour finished so as to not hurt the band, and if the timeline of events is true she endured a lot of shit over several years before finally filing the lawsuit. My gut reading of all this is that she's not out for blood or a payday.

I don't think the (amount of) money is that important to her, and the alleged harassment is more of an annoyance than something she would have sued over in itself. GN'R wanted to control how their images were used, and this inadvertedly created a situation where she felt disrespected as an artist - that's what this is about, acknowledging professional photography as a legitimate art form and assigning appropriate credit to the artist.

The harassment accusations are the incendiary part of all this, but she really just threw those in there to get them to take this seriously. I think if they show *genuine* remorse for the way the photography was handled and work out a way to acknowledge her work (plus get Fernando to commit to chill the fuck out), she'd be open to having all this go away and even continuing a working partnership. It should be possible to peacefully resolve this without much of a cost to the band, and everything goes to shit if they take this to trial and lose. There are times to go to war, but sometimes there's better outcomes in recognizing the other side has a point and mending fences.

Once again, THEY PAID HER TO MAKE PHOTOS FOR THEM. They took her out on “364 shows or 30 ‘legs’” for what? For her to walk away, claiming and demanding sole ownership of the photos and for them to have nothing?? Get real. I agree with the bolded.

Also she didn't wait to sue. She apparantly tried to sue already at the beginning of the year and somehow that got botched up.

39 minutes ago, axl666 said:

That's a fair point. I guess it depends on the extent you can separate the art from the artist. I don't think I can. So if it went to a jury trial and there was a guilty verdict that would be the moment for me. Everyone's different, I realise that.

Still, even more so if you let a bunch of jurors, who still could get it wrong, decide for you. At least you should follow the the trial, if there is one and make up your own mind.

Just now, DoubleTalkinComa said:

The whole "I didn't respect women until I had daughters" gives "I'm not racist! I have a friend who is black!" energy.

Yeah. And those daughters are still separate from all other women.

15 minutes ago, weaponsnflowers said:

Of course it could also be that he actually doesn't have recollection of that spesific night. Maybe Axl has had plenty of such nights and this doesn't stick out, no matter how much she stuck a finger up his ass. 

Oh, it's a common occurence for him then? If he doesn't have a recollection, then it isn't a denial. It could have happened then.

4 minutes ago, axl666 said:

I guess maybe people turn to pop culture to escape from the difficulties of the world. If this escape itself becomes distressing that's hard to deal with. I really like gnr but was thinking today that depending on how all this turns out I might need to delete all of their music. I really don't want to do that. I can see why people don't want to think about it.

Deleting music because of something that supposedly happened 34 years ago and you found out now about it?? How ridiculous.

On 11/13/2023 at 4:58 PM, ZoSoRose said:

Been a long time since I have made a thread like this. Does anyone keep a running list of all the people they have seen in- person? I have been keeping track since I started going to shows and it is a great way to remember them all and take a mental trip down memory lane! After a packed year, my upcoming list is winding down, so I figured now would be a good time to post my list. I'd love to see everyone's show list if you have them! Here is mine-

Yeah. I have, as I noticed to tend to forget concerts and dates, especially for events where you don't get to keep your tickets or only get a wristband. So while I had my written list for many years, some years ago I put all my attended concerts on Setlist.fm: https://www.setlist.fm/concerts/PatrickS77 I like that you also get some statistics there. It tells me that I saw 1435 concerts by 598 different artists.

5 minutes ago, BucketEgg said:

Let's pretend Axl's lawyer's TMZ statement is completely true:

Gutman continues ... "Though he doesn’t deny the possibility of a fan photo taken in passing, Mr. Rose has no recollection of ever meeting or speaking to the Plaintiff, and has never heard about these again fictional allegations prior to today."

Finally, he finishes with this ... "Mr. Rose is confident this case will be resolved in his favor."

 

So a complete denial, nope I don't remember her at all.

That brings up the question on what exactly did happen on that alleged day? We don't know, but if her entire story is fictitious, then why did she mention other people like Rachtman being there on that night, that could instantly deny her ever meeting Axl, making Axl's statement true for that night, and making her story seem not credible?

If only part of it is fictitious but someone was there to witness Axl and Kennedy meeting, then why did Axl's camp quickly respond with a statement completely denying everything, instead of keeping quiet or more vague? Then that would make Axl's side seem not credible either.

Having no recollection isn't a denial though that it never happened. A complete denial would be to say that he has never met this woman. No recollection bullshit. Having no recollection is an out for him, should it get proven (Rachtman or any of the other people) that he in fact met or spoke to the person. He can't even deny to ever have taken a photo with her.

On 11/19/2023 at 11:15 PM, allwaystired said:

I think the users of this forum and especially this thread have perhaps made up their own mind about your intellectual prowess, so I don't feel the need to stoop to low level playground insults. 

Have a wonderful evening oh wise one. 

 

Yeah. Whatever.

https://imgur.com/gallery/ajAsG7o

10 minutes ago, BluegrassBlues said:

I didn't mean anything about Beta and her family, I meant this band in general 

Ah, then you'd better phrase that differently, as the poster above you seems to blame the brazilians.

2 minutes ago, DeNfr said:

I love the "34 years later to come forward it's a cash grab" argument, like, Axl wasn't already a rich man in the 90's

 

 

I love that here, people are sure it is a cash grab, wheras with Fernando you're the devil if you think that.

3 minutes ago, BluegrassBlues said:

Ain't that the truth  

Is it though? How is that the brazils fault??