Jump to content

"Axl Rose Suing Guitar Hero Makers".


Chinese Destruction

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 486
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Will it go to court?

Will it be settled out of court?

Will we ever hear about the out come?

Activision are tough, and I doubt they will hand out sums of cash willy nilly.

This is nothing more than a nuisance suit for Activision.....If Axl will settle for a fraction of the 20 Million they may throw him a bone to make it go away...Depends on what Axl is willing to settle for.....Happens all the time as Companies don't want to waste time and energy on chump change lawsuits....

Whether or not it's a "nuisance" suit depends on how true the allegations are. If they are true, then Activision has reason to be worried. But, regardless, Axl will likely settle for a smaller amount with an admission of wrongdoing privately and a likely public NDA.

Ali

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'He also says the company used another Guns N' Roses song, "Sweet Child of Mine," without permission in Guitar Hero 3.'

I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.

Should Activision pay out on Sweet Child of Mine, surely all in involved (Slash, Duff, Adler, Izzy etc) should get an equal cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'He also says the company used another Guns N' Roses song, "Sweet Child of Mine," without permission in Guitar Hero 3.'

I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.

Should Activision pay out on Sweet Child of Mine, surely all in involved (Slash, Duff, Adler, Izzy etc) should get an equal cut.

there you go again... with what you believe or not...

it doesn't really matter what you believe, since, it's evident that you do it or you don't based on what? on presumptions?

wouldn't it be easier for you to stick to comment facts rather what you "believe"?

is this a little church were one can always question it's mini god?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will it go to court?

Will it be settled out of court?

Will we ever hear about the out come?

Activision are tough, and I doubt they will hand out sums of cash willy nilly.

This is nothing more than a nuisance suit for Activision.....If Axl will settle for a fraction of the 20 Million they may throw him a bone to make it go away...Depends on what Axl is willing to settle for.....Happens all the time as Companies don't want to waste time and energy on chump change lawsuits....

Whether or not it's a "nuisance" suit depends on how true the allegations are. If they are true, then Activision has reason to be worried. But, regardless, Axl will likely settle for a smaller amount with an admission of wrongdoing privately and a likely public NDA.

Ali

Maybe Axl is using it as another chance to have a pop at Slash in a tit for tat way.

Maybe Activision have their house in order, and either Slash or Axl is at fault. Thus one would have to pay the other.

'He also says the company used another Guns N' Roses song, "Sweet Child of Mine," without permission in Guitar Hero 3.'

I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.

Should Activision pay out on Sweet Child of Mine, surely all in involved (Slash, Duff, Adler, Izzy etc) should get an equal cut.

there you go again... with what you believe or not...

it doesn't really matter what you believe, since, it's evident that you do it or you don't based on what? on presumptions?

wouldn't it be easier for you to stick to comment facts rather what you "believe"?

is this a little church were one can always question it's mini god?

Like I said, 'I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.' Activision are huge, and I doubt they would overlook such details. I bet they have something in writing saying they can use the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will it go to court?

Will it be settled out of court?

Will we ever hear about the out come?

Activision are tough, and I doubt they will hand out sums of cash willy nilly.

This is nothing more than a nuisance suit for Activision.....If Axl will settle for a fraction of the 20 Million they may throw him a bone to make it go away...Depends on what Axl is willing to settle for.....Happens all the time as Companies don't want to waste time and energy on chump change lawsuits....

Whether or not it's a "nuisance" suit depends on how true the allegations are. If they are true, then Activision has reason to be worried. But, regardless, Axl will likely settle for a smaller amount with an admission of wrongdoing privately and a likely public NDA.

Ali

Maybe Axl is using it as another chance to have a pop at Slash in a tit for tat way.

Maybe Activision have their house in order, and either Slash or Axl is at fault. Thus one would have to pay the other.

'He also says the company used another Guns N' Roses song, "Sweet Child of Mine," without permission in Guitar Hero 3.'

I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.

Should Activision pay out on Sweet Child of Mine, surely all in involved (Slash, Duff, Adler, Izzy etc) should get an equal cut.

there you go again... with what you believe or not...

it doesn't really matter what you believe, since, it's evident that you do it or you don't based on what? on presumptions?

wouldn't it be easier for you to stick to comment facts rather what you "believe"?

is this a little church were one can always question it's mini god?

Like I said, 'I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.' Activision are huge, and I doubt they would overlook such details. I bet they have something in writing saying they can use the song.

No, Axl is not suing Activition to get back at Slash. He isn't alleging Slash did anything illegal or wrong in the suit. The suit is about Activision and their behavior, not Slash, and that's why I don't agree at all with your theory.

Activision may not have maliciously used SCOM without license, but still done it out of carelessness or an honest mistake in thinking they had the proper license. Things slip through the cracks sometimes. It wouldn't be the first time a song has been used without the proper license.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will it go to court?

Will it be settled out of court?

Will we ever hear about the out come?

Activision are tough, and I doubt they will hand out sums of cash willy nilly.

This is nothing more than a nuisance suit for Activision.....If Axl will settle for a fraction of the 20 Million they may throw him a bone to make it go away...Depends on what Axl is willing to settle for.....Happens all the time as Companies don't want to waste time and energy on chump change lawsuits....

Whether or not it's a "nuisance" suit depends on how true the allegations are. If they are true, then Activision has reason to be worried. But, regardless, Axl will likely settle for a smaller amount with an admission of wrongdoing privately and a likely public NDA.

Ali

Maybe Axl is using it as another chance to have a pop at Slash in a tit for tat way.

Maybe Activision have their house in order, and either Slash or Axl is at fault. Thus one would have to pay the other.

'He also says the company used another Guns N' Roses song, "Sweet Child of Mine," without permission in Guitar Hero 3.'

I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.

Should Activision pay out on Sweet Child of Mine, surely all in involved (Slash, Duff, Adler, Izzy etc) should get an equal cut.

there you go again... with what you believe or not...

it doesn't really matter what you believe, since, it's evident that you do it or you don't based on what? on presumptions?

wouldn't it be easier for you to stick to comment facts rather what you "believe"?

is this a little church were one can always question it's mini god?

Like I said, 'I find it really hard to believe that Activision would use a song without permission.' Activision are huge, and I doubt they would overlook such details. I bet they have something in writing saying they can use the song.

No, Axl is not suing Activition to get back at Slash. He isn't alleging Slash did anything illegal or wrong in the suit. The suit is about Activision and their behavior, not Slash, and that's why I don't agree at all with your theory.

Activision may not have maliciously used SCOM without license, but still done it out of carelessness or an honest mistake in thinking they had the proper license. Things slip through the cracks sometimes. It wouldn't be the first time a song has been used without the proper license.

Before this 'suit' came about, was it public knowledge:

Guitar Hero could use the song Welcome to the Jungle, so as long as Activision did not use images of guitarist Slash.

Rock Band to not use any songs from Velvet Revolver.

It throws up some questions.

Why allow the song Welcome to the Jungle feat. Slash on lead guitar to appear in Guitar Hero, and not allow a video game character bearing similarities to Slash appear in the game?

"They made money hand over fist on this video game, in large part because the biggest song was 'Welcome to the Jungle'" - Skip Miller

Guitar Hero sold well because it featured Slash. Activision wanted Slash in the game for all these reasons.

Who is Axl Rose to tell the makers of Rock Band who they can and can't have in their game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious.

How do any of you know Activision breached the contract? Have you read it? You guys do realize a lawsuit is usually the last course of action, right?

Something tells me that the boys at Activision, think they might be ok.

Filing a lawsuit is often the first step in beginning negotiations. A trial would be the last resort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...