Blackstar

As far as different lineups go, there's objective legitimacy and subjective legitimacy.

There are/were other bands that underwent many lineup changes and continued with only one original member. Off the top of my head: The Smashing Pumpkins, The Fall, PiL, The Sisters of Mercy...

All the lineups of those bands, GnR included, are objectively legitimate, as it was the remaining member's legal right to continue under the band's name.

The subjective legitimacy depends on the perception of the fans and of the public in general, i.e. whether a band is perceived as a group or as the vehicle of one or two of its members. In the case of GnR, the majority of the fans and of the general public saw it as either a group or as Axl and Slash, so the NuGnR lineups were illegitimate to their eyes; for a smaller portion of the fans, on the other hand, Axl was the driving force, so the NuGnR lineups were as legitimate as the classic lineups. The majority (or a large portion) of the fans of the other bands mentioned didn't mind. Also, other fans consider the musical direction a determining factor for the legitimacy and other fans don't. Then there are cases where even the absence of one original member makes the band illegitimate to the eyes of the fans, e.g. The Doors. So it's basically a question of the perception of the majority.

To me NuGnR (with all its lineups) was a different band, but I find it pointless to debate whether it was "real" GnR or not, as it was objectively legitimate and the rest - although what the majority thinks matters and is not irrelevant - is subjective.

There is also this case pending in the US Trademark Office: 

On 5/10/2019 at 11:48 PM, soon said:

Right on. The Pitchfork article posted earlier in the thread mentioned that the brewery indicated it would continue selling the beer for almost a year (until March 2020). I take that as meaning they will continue to sell the beer with the current Guns N' Rose branding even without the trademark? Unless the article was lazily researched/written that is - the article has been posted 22 hours and the brewery abandoned their application prior to that as it was filed on May 1/19. Perhaps the brewery made that statement after receiving the infringement claim but before giving in and abandoning their tm application.

If abandoning the TM application was not one and the same as discontinuing the beer, then I suppose Axl/Slash/Duff could choose to enforce their successful claim and/or take other legal actions? 

Yeah, this seems to be the case. Probably the brewery company has already done deals and orders, so they want to continue with the Guns N' Rose branding without the trademark, so GN'R filed a lawsuit. I posted a link to the lawsuit in the relevant thread.

The document of the lawsuit:

https://www.docdroid.net/zZAOia1/20190509-gnr-vs-oscar-blues.pdf

----

GN'R had filed a "notice of opposition"/complaint to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in March

https://tsdrsec.uspto.gov/ts/cd/casedocs/pdf/proxy?url=http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91247205-OPP-1.pdf

and the brewery company abandoned its application for registration of the "Guns N' Rose" trademark

https://tsdrsec.uspto.gov/ts/cd/casedocs/sn88062803/mega-bundle-download?docs=&assignments=&prosecutionHistory=3

but apparently it wants to continue selling products under the brand for another year, so GN'R filed the lawsuit. It says that the company also sells bandanas with the "Guns N' Rose" brand.

3 hours ago, soon said:

I wonder if they already sued the pants off of the cheese people? 

In both cases Axl and Del-the-Smell just demanded payment in kind in the form of beer and cheese  "Give me my cheese homefuck, you dig what Im saying? Owwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!" 

I'm not sure if they have grounds to sue the cheese, as it uses a song title which is not a trademark like the band name. Maybe only for using their likeness, but I'm not sure about this either.

The lawsuit/complaint to the US Trademark Office for the beer was filed by Axl, Slash and Duff as partners. Here is the document:

https://tsdrsec.uspto.gov/ts/cd/casedocs/pdf/proxy?url=http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91247205-OPP-1.pdf

As the article says, the brewery company abandoned its application for registration of the trademark. Document:

https://tsdrsec.uspto.gov/ts/cd/casedocs/sn88062803/mega-bundle-download?docs=&assignments=&prosecutionHistory=3

Looks like it was an April Fool joke. 

The article was published on March 31 and its first reference link to the supposed Axl interview leads here:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/117/432/515.gif

1 minute ago, Tom-Ass said:

Axl is the only person on the cover of the album.

Maybe Paul Huge or West Arkeen? This has bugged me for 30 years hahah.

He looks like Paul Huge a bit.  But what would he be doing there with a bass? 

Could it be McBob?

4 minutes ago, Euchre said:

Duff missed a few shows in 88 and was replaced by Haggis aka Kid Chaos from the Cult. Could it be that guy ?

No, he doesn't look like Haggis

It isn't Ole Beich either. 

This interview was done more recently:

https://loudwire.com/slash-boulevard-of-broken-hearts-live-video-guns-n-roses-interview/

GNR writing is probably held off until after your touring is done. But have you ...

No, we're actually into it now, but at the same time everybody's still busy with a million other things. We haven't been able to sit down and completely focus on just the one thing, but we have been toying around with stuff.

Do you have material that you've already written and intend to present to the band, or does it kind of work more where everyone gets in a room and works it up from scratch?

I think there's no set rule for this. I don't think anything has been worked up to the point of ... well, let's put it this way. Ideas are coming in.

11 minutes ago, Georgina Arriaga said:

That interview was at the same time of the Rolling Stone Argentina one.

He was asked about the MJ documentary and was made in early april.

This one, where he was asked about the MJ doc and the Motley movie and he said the same as in RS Argentina about the GNR album, was done at the same time as well:

Apparently Slash did a series of interviews with South American media in early April to promote his upcoming tour there, just some of them are released now. And I bet he said the same things in all the interviews, but something was lost in translation in the VOS one.

1 hour ago, soon said:

Never heard them before. Sounds great. The live clip in the OP has lots of American jam band elements which I dig. Psychedelic isnt it? To my ears that live track fits in with Spiritualized and Mogwai, but I dont know how the scenes all fit together. If Im not mistaken this coincided with the neo-hippie thing in the US with String Cheese Incident, Phish, Ween, Blind Melon and Black Crowes - this sounds like the alt rock edge of the psychedelic revival?

Whatever it is, its cool!

Not exactly coincided, the Stone Roses and other UK bands of that scene broke a little earlier than the US bands you mention and I think one was independent to the other. Although yeah, I guess they can all be called "neo-hippie," I don't think there was any kind of "communication" or influence and the UK bands had incorporated more groove and dance elements.

That UK scene that we called "Manchester" (because many bands were from there) and was also called "baggy" in the music press was the thing in the UK and most of the rest of Europe, I believe, for about 2-3 years before grunge hit. Some bands pre-existed, mainly the Happy Mondays which were kind of pioneers, but the scene peaked around the time of the Stone Roses debut. Then it declined for various reasons, with one being that it took too long for the Stone Roses to record their follow-up, which, although not bad didn't live up to the hype of the first one and then they broke up; the Happy Mondays also broke up, and those were the two main "Manchester" bands. Other bands, like the Charlatans, were kind of incorporated into britpop.

2 hours ago, Ivana979 said:

Did anyone read W.A.R. the unauthorised biography of Axl Rose?

I have read chapters of it. Judging from those, I think it's a very badly written book.

Axl: "... Then George [Harrison] takes us over to meet Bob Dylan. Bob asks me, 'When are you gonna record Heaven's Door?' I said, 'I don't know, but we really love that song.' And he says, 'I don't give a fuck. I just want the money.' True story." [Live in Taiwan, Dec. 11, 2009]

Probably that's why Axl introduced KOHD at some UYI shows saying something along the lines of "Now it's time to make Bob Dylan some money."

Bob Dylan: “Guns N’ Roses is okay, Slash is okay, but there’s something about their version of the song that reminds me of the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I always wonder who's been transformed into some sort of clone, and who's stayed true to himself. And I never seem to have an answer." [The Telegraph, 1992]

Slash has been bitching for 30 years about Dylan not using his solo

Many Greek people don't share the opinion of the Mayor quoted in the Guardian article.

The Greek crisis has to do with the structure of the Greek capitalism, but also a lot to do with the structure of the EU and the way it operates, and even more so with the Euro zone.  And Greece, although the worst case, hasn't been the only country affected; there's Portugal, Spain...

Greece has been an economy based mostly on services (mainly tourism) and agriculture. It has also, as a small economy, always imported more goods than exported. This passive trade balance worsened since the country entered the EU. Part of it is because its -mostly light- industry, like textile industry, declined in an increasingly globalised economy and many factories were closed. But it's mostly because of the Common Agriculture Policy of the EU, as the biggest percentage of Greek exports consisted of agricultural products. CAP imposed the destruction of the surplus of certain products, which resulted into Greece importing goods that it previously had full supply of and also had surplus to export. A portion of the farmers have benefited individually from the policy - a few of them became even rich - as they have been subsidised according to the quantity of crop they destroyed. Consumers haven't been affected directly either, as a lemon from, say, South America is as much of a lemon as a Greek one. The long-term effect in the economy of the country has been destructive though. The farmers are responsible too, since they could invest the subsidy to cultivate something else that was allowed, but, really, why not take the easy way by continuing to cultivate the same product and then bury it, since they were encouraged to do so?

As for the Euro zone, the common currency, built upon the strongest national currencies, namely the German mark, can't work in different and unequal economies and it benefits the strongest ones. Moreover, the weaker countries are deprived of options to handle the crisis on a local level, e.g. by devaluating the currency.   Of course Greece entered the Euro zone willingly through its then "socialist" government which inflicted austerity measures to make the economy supposedly qualified. Now most people realise that the benefits have been much less than the disadvantages. But the Euro zone is something like Hotel California for countries like Greece: you can enter (although not any time you like) but you can't leave without severe consequences. 

In my opinion, the EU (and the Euro zone), as is, can't be reformed or improved. The "solidarity" and all that is just a nice facade. The EU has been built as a hyper-capitalist entity led by a bureaucracy, through which countries protect and expand their own national interests (the refugee crisis is another example of that) and those of their corporations and banks; and, given the inequality of economical and political power, this can't result into a balance of interests of some sort.

Having said all that, the problem I and other people have is that at this moment the most vocal opposition to the EU comes from a far right and nationalist perspective with a lot of xenophobic rhetoric. The anti-EU voices from a left point of view are marginal. A big portion of the genuine (not the faux socialist) left that has remained is trapped between two evils and chooses the EU as the lesser one (taking into account the past traumas of a divided Europe that led into wars - even though the EU doesn't coincide with Europe which is still divided, as Russia is Europe too) and limits itself into a wishful thinking rhetoric about "reformation." The people who don't like either the EU or nationalism feel that, realistically speaking and apart from a utopia where there will be some sort of revolution and the people of Europe will built a new union from the start based on real solidarity etc., it's a dead end right now.

It definitely doesn't sound like a malicious thing (if it really was a sabotage) but more like that someone thought it would be funny to cause a Spinal Tap moment to Spinal Tap

Axl likes pranks, but I can't picture him doing it at that particular show. I think he'd probably had been nervous about meeting and playing with Elton John for the first time.

12 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

If I was to get into a tizzy everytime someone slagged off The Sex Pistols I'd've died of a heart attack long ago, they are pretty consistently slagged off since their inception.  Its sort of a badge of honour for me, the horriblest band in the world, I have an on-going affection for pantomine villainy, there's a wonderful line in the beginning of The Great Rock n Roll Swindle, 'the most notorious filthy disgusting dirtiest rock n roll band in the whole bloody world!', things like that are just curry to a pisshead for me, I find it delightful, anything like that immediately draws my attention ever since I was a kid and still does  

THAT, above, coming from a London Councillor, for a band...wow   'they are the antithesis of humankind' 'the whole world would be vastly improved by their total and utter non existence', 'i'd like to see someone dig a very large exceedingly deep hole and throw the whole bloody lot down it'...and with that, Len fell in love   This horrible ugly thing that crawled out of the gutters of the wanking shops of Soho, deformed Rotten, thieving bastard Steve Jones, hooligan Paul Cook, horrible unwashed guttersnipes with a Dickensian rag trade charlatan by the name of McLaren (mis)managing them, its almost like a fairytale, too brilliant to be real and too real to be a fairytale. 

I think it depends on whether they're slagged by the "cool" (or the ones who pass themselves as "cool") and the "hip" ones or by the uncool ones. I don't think this London Councilor was ever perceived as a cool person by the potential audience of a rock band ; as neither was Tipper Gore, for example, or neither would be a head of the Police or the Pope.

So when your favourite band is slagged by uncool authority figures, it is a badge of honour. But when it comes from a "hip" magazine or whatever it's another story.

45 minutes ago, soon said:

Id always rather passively assumed it was a referring to people holding a candle lit vigil. A vigil can be a way of holding onto hope. But I have no idea.

It is a folk expression, but Im not sure if thats how Axl is using it. Apparently the phrases meaning and origin goes like so:

What's the meaning of the phrase 'Hold a candle'?

The expression 'can't hold a candle to' refers to someone who compares badly to an known authority - to be unfit even to hold a subordinate position.

I think Axl definitely doesn't use it as in the definition in green, because it doesn't say "to hold a candle to (someone)."

I just read it as trying to hold onto a relationship that doesn't work anymore (because "hearts can change") is as hard as trying to hold a lit candle in the rain.

I'm not a fan of this school of "smartass" journalism that has thrived mostly in pop culture journalism. I don't find it challenging or funny. But maybe it's just me lacking the sense of humour to appreciate it.

Like in music, for example, when they try to apply smartass logic to pop/rock lyrics.

And I don't think this guy even does it well.

I've seen the line "reminds me of childhood memories" being mocked somewhere else, and at least there was a point there (memories contain reminding, so how can you be reminded of memories?)

Now, this:

Quote

It’s 28 years too late to ask this question, but I must: What is it about rain at any time of year that makes a candle more difficult to hold? Hard to light I will grant you, but do candles become slippery in rain?

Maybe I'm thick because I've never thought about or questioned this line (or thought that there was anything worth thinking). I just took it as given that it means to hold a lit candle, as a very simple (and not very imaginative) metaphor for troubled relationships, because there's no purpose of holding an unlit candle anywhere except for when you're about to light it.