"Axl Rose Suing Guitar Hero Makers".

[star]

'Guns N' Roses frontman Axl Rose is suing Activision for $20 million, claiming the publisher breached an agreement not to use the likeness of former guitarist Slash in Guitar Hero III.'

What the f*ck is Axl up to? other than a ca$h grab

..go and make another album.

Activison worked with Slash, and I don't see Slash complaining?

Slash made Welcome to the Jungle what it is..

..and Axl continues to use the song to promote his 'cover' band.

Maybe Slash should sue Axl for exploying a guitarist (Dj A.) that attempts to imitate (Slash)

he obviously has two problems

1.slash

2.promoting slash as part of guns n' roses, which is misleading.

i think he has a point. if you dont agree with him, you should at least be able to see where the guy is coming from.

lots of naysayers objected to this picture popping up in ads, its pretty misleading, i agree. but i think the slash / GHiii is just the other side of that same coin.

Slash appears in a game as Slash, playing a song by Slash, who was a member of Guns N'Roses, during the Jungle era.

Where's the issue?

The song has nothing to do with the current Guns N'Roses line up, other than Axl's input. Axl must have agreeed to his voice being used?

[Spuffy78]

'Guns N' Roses frontman Axl Rose is suing Activision for $20 million, claiming the publisher breached an agreement not to use the likeness of former guitarist Slash in Guitar Hero III.'

What the f*ck is Axl up to? other than a ca$h grab

..go and make another album.

Activison worked with Slash, and I don't see Slash complaining?

Slash made Welcome to the Jungle what it is..

..and Axl continues to use the song to promote his 'cover' band.

Maybe Slash should sue Axl for exploying a guitarist (Dj A.) that attempts to imitate (Slash)

he obviously has two problems

1.slash

2.promoting slash as part of guns n' roses, which is misleading.

i think he has a point. if you dont agree with him, you should at least be able to see where the guy is coming from.

lots of naysayers objected to this picture popping up in ads, its pretty misleading, i agree. but i think the slash / GHiii is just the other side of that same coin.

Slash appears in a game as Slash, playing a song by Slash, who was a member of Guns N'Roses, during the Jungle era.

Where's the issue?

The song has nothing to do with the current Guns N'Roses line up, other than Axl's input. Axl must have agreeed to his voice being used?

I believe that's the other part of the issue. That he didn't sign clearance for the song to be used.

[gnrlies]

ahh jesus...

Axl can do some great things when it comes to music. I love GNR, but it has to be said that he is the biggest dickhead the world has ever seen. I don't give a shit how many albums he's sold, I couldn't care less how many people on this forum will back him up - but man to man, Axl - your a fucking loser. Get over yourself. I'll still come and see you in concert, and listen to your music, but for fuck sake, grow up. I know you've had a tough life, but man your almost 50. Most people your age have gotten past any demons they had when they were 12, you clearly haven't. Its disappointing that no-one around you has the balls to tell you how it really is (or perhaps whats worse is that you ignore those who do ). Sure you have your millions, you have your legacy, but when you die, no-ones gonna love you. I don't mean love you for your music, I mean love you for you. No-one loves you for you.

To all those ass lickers on this forum who stick up for Axl - get a life. Seriously. Stop defending him just in case he comes online and see's your posts. What do you think he's going to do? Invite you to his castle in Malibu to thank you for your words? Seriously, stop being losers. See things for how they really are and stop pretending that Axl deserves the benefit of the doubt, because if it smells like shit, it probably is.

Whether Axl is technically right or not is besides the point. How bitter must you be to stipulate that a game can only contain a song if it does not contain the involvement of the guy who wrote the song, or his subsequent works. How many years is it? 15? If you had your head out of your arsehole you could have started a family, or done something meaningful with your life such that you would realise that none of this is important. Then perhaps you would get over yourself and stop dragging other people down with you.

I don't know you, maybe I got you wrong. But I doubt it.

[plonker88]

Axl isn't trying to negate Slash's contribution to the song, he can't, but what he is doing is looking out for the interests of the new band and having Slash constantly associated with the name Guns N' Roses is counterproductive to what Guns currently is. Hasn't Slash been trying to distance himself from Guns also? Axl is doing him a favour if that's what Slash really wants.

[Dead Flower]

having Slash constantly associated with the name Guns N' Roses is counterproductive to what Guns currently is.

don't be absurd.

[Jackie Moon]

Slash appears in a game as Slash, playing a song by Slash, who was a member of Guns N'Roses, during the Jungle era.

Where's the issue?

The song has nothing to do with the current Guns N'Roses line up, other than Axl's input. Axl must have agreeed to his voice being used?

i personally dont have an issue with it, so i understand the ??? reaction.

but put yourself in axls high top, personalized shoes. with all the drama, all the changes, all the years, in 2007 you buy guitar hero. slash is on the box.

you get to a specific point where you battle slash. when you beat him, you both play

Welcome to the Jungle

Guns N' Roses

together.

he is on the box, he is in the commercials, there is a guns n' roses sticker included with the game.

its 2007 and CD is right around the corner.

believe it or not, there are a lot of people out there with zero interest in gnr, slash, axl, ect. they dont know much about gnr but they are vaguely aware of the band, (a person once asked me, is that the band with the rose brothers?), and here is slash playing jungle, the most famous song, under Guns N' Roses.

remember, youre not star, you're not jackie moon (you wish), youre axl.

cant you see how that would be an issue?

i think axl feels like he was mislead as to how closely slash and the GN'R name would be associated in the game. thats why he is pissed and thats why he is fighting back.

again, dont have to agree with him, but its understandable.

[saulhudson88]

So he wants to get 20million dollar for that? Unfuckingbelievable... When you think, you can't go any more lower...

it's about the money, that's for sure

[The Glow Inc.]

As much as I HATE Activision ( fuck them for destroying the best rpg developper there ever was, Troïka Interactive ), I wish Axl was as prolific in the studio as he is in the courtroom

As far as the "brand" goes, of course he has every right to sue them...but I'd say that all these lawsuits are harming Guns n' Roses ( inactivity, bad press, money burnt in the lawsuits, confusion etc... ) more than Slash appearing in Guitar Hero.

And ironically enough, I have a Slash ad at the top of the page and a Guitar Hero one at the bottom as I'm writing this

[RocknRoller]

i dont see a problem with slash / jungle / VR DLC, i think this is a case of axl being paranoid and obsessive..

but, if i did have to pick something to go hmmmm about, its the inclusion of a

sticker with the game.

Yes, this along with the fact that Activision went astray

of the contract, This is not a money issue,it's setting a precedent,if Activision was allowed to carry on with this cheap charade and cheat on the terms agreed upon, that would undoubtedly open the door for others to exploit GNR as well, It's a well thought out lawsuit and I'm sure nobody is surprised that the Activision nonsense,that has been previously mentioned is now being sorted out.

[Butters]

Axl has some serious hatred for Slash. This lawsuit is about being lied and fucked over by Activision, but still it says alot about Axl.

[Orsys]

ahh jesus...

Axl can do some great things when it comes to music. I love GNR, but it has to be said that he is the biggest dickhead the world has ever seen. I don't give a shit how many albums he's sold, I couldn't care less how many people on this forum will back him up - but man to man, Axl - your a fucking loser. Get over yourself. I'll still come and see you in concert, and listen to your music, but for fuck sake, grow up. I know you've had a tough life, but man your almost 50. Most people your age have gotten past any demons they had when they were 12, you clearly haven't. Its disappointing that no-one around you has the balls to tell you how it really is (or perhaps whats worse is that you ignore those who do ). Sure you have your millions, you have your legacy, but when you die, no-ones gonna love you. I don't mean love you for your music, I mean love you for you. No-one loves you for you.

To all those ass lickers on this forum who stick up for Axl - get a life. Seriously. Stop defending him just in case he comes online and see's your posts. What do you think he's going to do? Invite you to his castle in Malibu to thank you for your words? Seriously, stop being losers. See things for how they really are and stop pretending that Axl deserves the benefit of the doubt, because if it smells like shit, it probably is.

Whether Axl is technically right or not is besides the point. How bitter must you be to stipulate that a game can only contain a song if it does not contain the involvement of the guy who wrote the song, or his subsequent works. How many years is it? 15? If you had your head out of your arsehole you could have started a family, or done something meaningful with your life such that you would realise that none of this is important. Then perhaps you would get over yourself and stop dragging other people down with you.

I don't know you, maybe I got you wrong. But I doubt it.

I think you may have missed the point. It's not about putting down the old GnR, it's about establishing the image of GnR in its current state, moving his business forward, and to do that you want the focus to be on that current state. Focus on the old GnR is counterproductive to your own business plan. But regardless, when you agree that Y will be done and Y needs to be done to align with your own business plan, and if not Y then no thank you to the deal, and then behind your back X is done how do you not respond to that? The suit's focus is not Slash, Activision's misrepresentation focused on Slash and Axl's suit is responding.

[RocknRoller]

Next thing you know Axl will be suing Slash for wearing the tophat claiming it "is Guns N Roses property".

This is seriously pathetic, even for Axl.

Your glory days are over pal, everybody in the music industry knows it.

Sure,that is why they are selling out venues on tour, and you act like slash invented the damn tophat, look up Marc Bolan and Mr. Peanut

Sounds like you have shit for brains. Get some english lessons pal, then you might actually understand what you read instead of second-guessing and making false assumptions.

Oh my, such a hostile reply,so am I to understand,if I take your post literally that you are in fact speaking for "everyone in the music industry?",I find that highly unlikely,improbable at best,and add Stevie Nicks and Alice Cooper to the list of those that also wore Top Hats before slash "invented" it

And to stay on topic shall I spell it out that Activision is being prosecuted,not slash,in fact maybe Activision lied to slash too,Can't wait to see if he responds to this

[Kickingthehabit]

It's a messy situation, as technically there are two legal entities known as Guns N' Roses. Everything pre-1995 is controlled by Axl, Slash and Duff under a partnership agreement that still exists. Technically and legally, Slash is in Guns N' Roses — he's just not a member of the band that was established post-1995. It's going to be difficult for Axl to argue this case, as Slash is still a copyright holder of the music and has exclusive rights over most of the original band's artwork..

What Axl's lawyers will argue is that Activision knowingly and maliciously placed confusion on the current "brand" and misappropriated it for their own benefit. But again, this is gray territory, as Slash still has a qualifying interest in what we'll call the "original brand". He's an owner, so his rights with regard to everything pre-1995 cannot be denied. What Axl is saying is that he licensed Welcome to the Jungle, but in theory, would not have wanted Slash associated with the song. Ironically, Axl wouldn't have been able to license Jungle had Slash objected to its usage in the game — because he's partial owner. Do you see how crazy it gets?

I can't imagine this going far. Activision is owned by Vivendi, which is a $60 billion dollar media conglomerate..

-Kickingthehabit

[RocknRoller]

Axl has some serious hatred for Slash. This lawsuit is about being lied and fucked over by Activision, but still it says alot about Axl.

Oh Really? This is a clearcut suit against Activision,slash is not being included in the litigation other than his "image" so you must have information we aren't privvy to,care to share or show a source for this conclusion?

[Spoon87]

12 pages? For this? Really??

[AngelZ]

axl is in guns n roses.

props to him for finally admitting what most fans already knew but a few naive ones refused to believe

this was never a band in his eyes

doesnt matter what contributions they make or how long theyve been a part of it

its only about Axl

wonder how it makes the current members feel, the ones who put years into making CD or who are looking forward to a new album

to know that they can never be associated with the music they helped create

not much of an incentive to want to make more with the guy

makes sense why there were no videos and no promotion

he doesnt want any member profiting off or being associated with his name

he tours because he needs the cash and he knows hes the one everyone came to see anyway

[LesPaul_Player_91]

The amount of Axl nut-swinging by 2 people here in this thread in particular is absolutely insane... Seriously that kind of fan devotion and defense is downright scary..

Funny how all of Axl's bitching about litigation that he seems more then willing to want to go after this. Not to mention the Irving Azoff case, and the Dr Pepper thing...

so if you own something anyone can use it for profit? Ok cool!

I aint swinging myself I see the mans point, I also now see why he is so careful with the band name and imagery. At the end of the day though I don't care much really it is a battle fought between lawyers about something that does not involve me except for the fact that this likely destroys any chance of a cool game with the current line up

I highly doubt there will ever be a game featuring the current line up. They're just not that well known to the general public.

What about the Chinese Democracy DLC on RB2? The whole album....

I'll give you that but I was referring to the likelyhood of a Guitar Hero: Guns N' Roses game like the Metallica, Van Halen, Aerosmith ones. I can't see a fully blown GN'R game featuring CG versions of the current lineup. It would be awsome though. Animated Bumble in Guitar Hero would be awsome, even if I don't like the games.

[SpiritDave]

Axl complains about lawsuits all the time, yet he's filing them too.

If you ask me, he should accept that Slash wrote the song, and that he cannot make up such stupid rules in the first place. I hate the business man Axl Rose. He's a terrible, evil person. I love the performer and songwriter... but the businessman? No. He's wasting time. How many musicians do this? Most musicians concentrate on music and performance and deal with lawsuits on the side. Axl's whole last decade and a half has been a career of lawsuits , of which many he's filed himself, and oh yeah ... a TINY bit of music and performance on the side.

[Stro]

Actually I'd imagine that a good deal of bands/musicians of comparable sizes to what GNR was are regularly involved in lawsuits. Especially with things like digital downloads, RB/GH games, other games that license songs, reality shows that use snipits of songs. Because he's Axl, people know about it more. But I wouldn't be surprised if bands like KISS, Bon Jovi, Poison, Aerosmith, AC/DC, et al have multiple lawsuits a year that many would consider frivolous.

[Bumble's Bridge Pickup]

I think I see where Axl is coming from, I think he has a point, Activision shouldn't be allowed to associate Slash as a (current) member of GN'R, but this is a bit silly IMO. I didn't think he meant that he'd actually do it when he mentioned this in the chats.

Well whatever, he's Axl Rose, it's nothing new really.

EDIT: I don't think it's about money, if it was, there are still a million more profitable and easier things he could do right now to get instant heaps of cash.

Edited November 24, 2010 by Jyrgen

[Tater Totts]

Inevitable that this will cause CD 2 to get delayed.

[sergiodefenders]

Axl, get over it!!. You like it or not, Slash will allways be associated with Guns n' Roses. Nowdays, 2010!! people keep listennig Appetite for Destruction instead of Chinese Democracy. People stills love how to Slash plays GNR songs live, people still wish a reunion!!

We love both, Axl & Slash, at he end of the day, they are Guns n' Roses.

[RocknRoller]

anyone debating the merit, or axl's chances in this case is a fucking mongoloid. lawfirms don't sue companies as powerful as activision on the off chance that they might win, or that their claim just might hold up in court - activision breached the contract and as a result is liable to be sued, since they did breach the contract they will be paying $20 million to our friend Axl.

"hey axl man, so you wanna give that activision lawsuit a shot? its a 50/50 chance we'll win and if we don't you're looking at millions of dollars in legal fees, costly court proceedings that could possibly drag on for years, and if we do lose you might be liable to a counter-suit. so what do ya say, wanna give it a shot? one last hoorah?"

It's a moot point, slash is not being sued,Activision is,and the reason is not for money,it's for thier blatant misuse and contractual obligations that were intentionally misused and abused,what is so difficult to comprehend that this is in no way about money,it's about drawing a line in the sand and standing up for what you believe in, to some people integrity still matters.

If it is not about the money why 20 million. Why not sue for principal and legal fees. Or better yet make a statement now that if the suit is won the money will go to the poor. There are valid arguments on both sides here but come on is all about the money.

No, unfortunately a slap on the wrist would not suffice to quell Activision from further actions like this,so you hit them where it hurts,in the pocketbook,the legal firm knows this and is proceeding with punitive damages because of contract contradictions on Activision's part,which were openly perpetrated, this action doesn't come as a surprise,it was mentioned a while back that it would have to be sorted out.

Why doesn't Axl donate to charity, he could use the help with his image. Oh, that's right, because it is about the money.

Why dont YOU donate to charity? When you do then you canshit on the ones than don't.

And why does mr."donate to charity" feel entitled to tell other people what to do with their money? and how do you know how someone else's money is spent? If you donate to charity you don't go around bragging about it unless you are doing it for all the wrong reasons.

[Bumble's Bridge Pickup]

Axl, get over it!!. You like it or not, Slash will allways be associated with Guns n' Roses. Nowdays, 2010!! people keep listennig Appetite for Destruction instead of Chinese Democracy. People stills love how to Slash plays GNR songs live, people still wish a reunion!!

We love both, Axl & Slash, at he end of the day, they are Guns n' Roses.

It's not about what the fans want him to do, it's about what he wants to do. He'll never get over it in that sense.

Edited November 24, 2010 by Jyrgen

[sphere79]

It's a messy situation, as technically there are two legal entities known as Guns N' Roses.

A bit OT but the business behind music has always fascinated me. Pink Floyd has a similar situation. The "classic" (actually it's the second version of the band but the most known) lineup was legally Pink Floyd Music Ltd. It still exists, and all 4 members (well, up until Rick Wright passed - now 3) are still voting members of the company. They handle back-catalog stuff, and used to handle licensing. When David Gilmour decided he was Pink Floyd (went over better than Axl's GNR but Gilmour at least had the backing of another member), he formed Pink Floyd Music (1987) Ltd. Also, apparently they agreed to split licensing of back-catalog merchandise - Roger Waters got all Wall-related rights and Pink Floyd (1987) Ltd. got everything else. I recently saw a new Dark Side of the Moon shirt with a picture of all 4 members - knowing Roger wrote all the words and was a big driving creative force but doesn't get a dime (especially when his face is on it) irks the heck out of me. I guess exclusive rights to merchandise for one of their biggest albums kinda makes up for it.

Regarding the lawsuit, if Activision had an agreement and broke it than the lawsuit is valid. However, to outsiders it sure is gonna reek of pettiness. From Axl's viewpoint, he doesn't want to sign off on old songs if new releases (GHIII) are going to push the old band or former members - I guess I can understand that. However, not many outside of us diehards really know the current band in America (tour already!), so it increases the perceived "sour grapes" quotient for many people.