"Axl Rose Suing Guitar Hero Makers".

[RocknRoller]

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.

Do not attempt to speak for everyone, I do not want a reunion, and slash is not in Guns N' Roses,it is 2010

things change, deal with it, hate on Activision for making this litigation necessary,not on GNR.

[yes i love you]

Pathetic- how very rock n roll ,killing the celebration of something that was good

Rose claims that Activision fraudulently induced him into allowing them use of Guns N' Roses' 'Welcome To The Jungle' in 'Guitar Hero III', reports Reuters.

The singer's complaint centres around the game's inclusion of a character modelled on his former bandmate Slash. Rose claims that he only allowed the use of 'Welcome To The Jungle' after Activision told him the game wouldn't feature any reference to Slash or his band, Velvet Revolver.

In a lawsuit filed to Los Angeles Superior Court yesterday (November 24), Rose accused Activision of "spinning a web of lies and deception to conceal its true intentions to not only feature Slash and Velvet Revolver prominently in 'Guitar Hero III', but also promote the game by emphasising and reinforcing an association between Slash and Guns N' Roses and the band's song 'Welcome To The Jungle'."

Additionally, he is arguing that he is owed damages as he only licensed the use of song 'Sweet Child O' Mine' for 'Guitar Hero II', but feels it also featured in the online promotion of its sequel.

Rose's lawyer, Skip Miller said: "This lawsuit is about protecting Guns N' Roses and 'Welcome to the Jungle' and is about holding Activision accountable for its misuse of these incredibly valuable assets."

This isn't the first time Rose has clashed with Activision. In December 2008, he accused the company of "low life chicanery" as he believed they'd use his songs without permission.

A date has yet to be set for the case to be heard.

nme.com

[roxxy]

Some days, I just don't understand what Axl has in his head...

[wkuk04]

Makes him look like rock rebel

[moreblack]

Axl should sue all the haters on this forum for defamation.

I think he could only sue Eric for providing the "haters" with a vehicle to vent their grievances...

[RocknRoller]

Axl should sue all the haters on this forum for defamation.

Not worth the time or effort,As important as they like to think they are,They don't really matter in the grand scheme of things

[blake-a-mania]

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.

not just for others to exploit GnR but also widens the door for music exploitation in general, its not like the music industry isnt corrupt enough already.

and to all those people saying that axl has no right to not want slash involved. why is that your business? legally axl has the say and its not your place to argue is it? are you one of the developers? directors? or producers of GH?

when activision spoke to page and plant about a led zep iteration, they listened to the plans activision had and when they were asked about the multitracks page said 'dont be silly' are you going to slate zep for that?

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.

what does it say? that he doesnt like

"being lied and fucked over by Activision"

or are you inferring something else there?

[moreblack]

Axl should sue all the haters on this forum for defamation.

Not worth the time or effort,As important as they like to think they are,They don't really matter in the grand scheme of things

plus, most buy his stuff anyway.

[ace]

Legally, Axl may be 100% in the right. This still makes him look like an asshole though. Slash is always going tom be associated with WTTJ, and Guitar Hero was smart enough to know that practically no one would be waiting in line to play as DJ Ashba. Telling them they can't offer VR tracks as downloads makes him look even worse, as if he's afraid of the competition.

Yeah, pretty much. It's the fact that he singles out the whole Slash-imagery thing that makes it seem like sour grapes more than a case of real legal concern. You can't really control pop culture - no matter how long it's been since he was in the band, that's always the band Slash is gonna be known for to most people, and it just seems silly to me to attack that.

Slash LEFT the band on his own, now he is trying to cash in on it? How is that ok? I fail to see how you think it is ok at all. In fact Slash is the first one in recent memory to NOT discuss Guns in interviews, so as long as he can use it to make money it's ok then? That is the problem, either distance yourself or embrace it by getting the rights to use the song, you can't have it both ways.

It is wrong, Slash knew it, and the makers of the game knew they did not have the rights issue figured out and decided to release it anyway. They honestly don't give a fuck is the message here.

Slash has a writing credit on the song. He has rights to the song. He was in the music video for it. He plays on it. But now he's not allowed to be associated with it?

Technically speaking, Slash is only being associated with the song, which he has the right to do, but it just so happens that it's a GnR song. He's "indirectly" being associated with GnR.

I thought from the chats, that Axl was going to sue because he wasn't informed that the song was going to be on the game, and he didn't get paid for it. If he was suing over that, it would be fine, as that's money that is legally owed to him. But suing over "Slash's relation to GnR"? That's just dumb.

When people sue for things they cover all the basis with the hope of winning some of them. It's like suing for $1,000,000 with the hope of settling for $500,000.

[seely]

Have to say i find it interesting Axl didnt even want any of the then-current members of Guns to be included either...

[tange]

I am shocked at some of the comments in this thread, but it certainly tells me alot about certain people.

The guy has a right to protect his fucking property. Was it right that he got full control of the name maybe not, but Slash is still able to put out live albums with old guns songs on them so its not as if he doesn't get to use them for his profit.

Some people on this board really only seem to be here to bring everybody else down and slag Axl for basically anything he does. What do you guys think you'll convince everybody to hate Axl? Whats the endgame? Maybe just to complain cause your life sucks? I don't know.

Some of us are into the new thing even though we like the old band too. If you don't like Chinese, nor Axl and think Slash rules the world go check out those sites. What do you really gain sitting around here bitchin and crying about something from so long ago.....you fags sound like Steven Adler.

[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.

not just for others to exploit GnR but also widens the door for music exploitation in general, its not like the music industry isnt corrupt enough already.

and to all those people saying that axl has no right to not want slash involved. why is that your business? legally axl has the say and its not your place to argue is it? are you one of the developers? directors? or producers of GH?

when activision spoke to page and plant about a led zep iteration, they listened to the plans activision had and when they were asked about the multitracks page said 'dont be silly' are you going to slate zep for that?

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.

what does it say? that he doesnt like

"being lied and fucked over by Activision"

or are you inferring something else there?

Good Post,I concur completely

[RocknRoller]

Axl should sue all the haters on this forum for defamation.

Not worth the time or effort,As important as they like to think they are,They don't really matter in the grand scheme of things

plus, most buy his stuff anyway.

Good Point!

[RocknRoller]

Pathetic- how very rock n roll ,killing the celebration of something that was good

Rose claims that Activision fraudulently induced him into allowing them use of Guns N' Roses' 'Welcome To The Jungle' in 'Guitar Hero III', reports Reuters.

The singer's complaint centres around the game's inclusion of a character modelled on his former bandmate Slash. Rose claims that he only allowed the use of 'Welcome To The Jungle' after Activision told him the game wouldn't feature any reference to Slash or his band, Velvet Revolver.

In a lawsuit filed to Los Angeles Superior Court yesterday (November 24), Rose accused Activision of "spinning a web of lies and deception to conceal its true intentions to not only feature Slash and Velvet Revolver prominently in 'Guitar Hero III', but also promote the game by emphasising and reinforcing an association between Slash and Guns N' Roses and the band's song 'Welcome To The Jungle'."

Additionally, he is arguing that he is owed damages as he only licensed the use of song 'Sweet Child O' Mine' for 'Guitar Hero II', but feels it also featured in the online promotion of its sequel.

Rose's lawyer, Skip Miller said: "This lawsuit is about protecting Guns N' Roses and 'Welcome to the Jungle' and is about holding Activision accountable for its misuse of these incredibly valuable assets."

This isn't the first time Rose has clashed with Activision. In December 2008, he accused the company of "low life chicanery" as he believed they'd use his songs without permission.

A date has yet to be set for the case to be heard.

nme.com

Why do you deem this as pathetic? If a business was in an agreement with you and blatantly blew off your contract, you would just let it go? That isn't very responsible nor smart.

[ManetsBR]

Some people here are really stupid.

Axl is absolutely right. It doesnt if Slash is the guitar player on Jungle, Activision had a contract with Axl and they didnt respect. Stop trying to see Axl as the vilain always, be logical. Axl had a contract with Activision and Activision didnt respect it in many ways, end of story. It doesnt matter if you think the requests Axl made on the contracts are ridiculous or not, all that matters is that there was a contract and Activision didnt respect it.

Its so simple.

That's how things works, contracts are made to be followed. It doesn't matter if you think the contract is ridiculous. Just read the document! Activision had a contract with Axl and they didn't respect it. End of story, Axl is 100% right.

[Chinese Destruction]

But laws overrule contracts and agreements. this sort of agreement harms slashs right as part owner of the song. thats why hes rightfully seen on the cover. as well as hes rightfully on the liner notes of the old records. He's part owner of these songs. who else if not him should be seen on it? Fink?, Fortus? Now that would be misleading.

If Slash wanted “Jungle” in Guitar Hero as a Slash track he should have recorded it himself. What I have a problem with is that Slash used the Guns N' Roses' (a band who he became disassociated with fifteen years ago) “Jungle”to promote both himself and Velvet Revolver. What Slash did was further the already existing distorted view of Guns N' Roses. And that's entirely unfair as he has no ownership of the brand whatsoever. Guns N' Roses overcame 1996 despite Slash (and indeed media) portrayals, therefore any otherwise suggestion (especially through international gamings franchises) should be 100% opposed.

Was it acceptable that a Guns N' Roses sticker for the guitar controller was part of the Guitar Hero III package? If anything the latter typifies Slash's attempts to plug his former GN'R membership to further his own agenda.

[moreblack]

and to all those people saying that axl has no right to not want slash involved. why is that your business? legally axl has the say and its not your place to argue is it? are you one of the developers? directors? or producers of GH?

it's a goddamn forum... what else are we gonna do here except discuss, dissect and speculate?!

Axl = drama. If we're not talking about the drama, we're not talking. Because we sure as hell don't talk about the music enough...

[Skulls]

Yeah, let's talk about how Axl has released 15 original songs in the last 20 years. Happy?

[ManetsBR]

Yeah, let's talk about how Axl has released 15 original songs in the last 20 years. Happy?

In the last 20 years? 43.

[SunnyDRE]

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.

Cool Cool...

So Axl can take 2 and some change of that 20 million, and pay Azoff and his attorneys; Since according to you,"law firms don't sue individuals on the off chance they might win or that claim just might hold up in court."

See how that works, jr?

Yeah, let's talk about how Axl has released 15 original songs in the last 20 years. Happy?

half of which, fans had already been listening to years before their actual release.

That's how things works, contracts are made to be followed. It doesn't matter if you think the contract is ridiculous. Just read the document! Activision had a contract with Axl and they didn't respect it. End of story, Axl is 100% right.

You've read the contract?

Links or pm please.

Edited November 24, 2010 by SunnyDRE

[Skulls]

I think Axl just got jealous reading the reviews of Kanye's new album and felt like he had to put something out this week.

[ManetsBR]

I think Axl just got jealous reading the reviews of Kanye's new album and felt like he had to put something out this week.

Yes, it was certainly that!

That's not the 1st time it happens:

"For the record this Guitar Hero (expletive) is breach of contract on a Bullys part and there will be a proper addressing of this and retraction.

We have NOTHING to do with this, it was presented to me and oi said 'show me a better avataR' TO DRAG MY HEELS., never did i intend on allowing GUITARHERO for me or for Kurt i am NOT yoko (expletive) Ono no ofense to her, but i am a different person entirely and this is insane."

Looks like this people from Guitar Hero/Activision are all a bunch bastards.

[SunnyDRE]

I think Axl just got jealous reading the reviews of Kanye's new album and felt like he had to put something out this week.

Yes, it was certainly that!

That's not the 1st time it happens:

"For the record this Guitar Hero (expletive) is breach of contract on a Bullys part and there will be a proper addressing of this and retraction.

We have NOTHING to do with this, it was presented to me and oi said 'show me a better avataR' TO DRAG MY HEELS., never did i intend on allowing GUITARHERO for me or for Kurt i am NOT yoko (expletive) Ono no ofense to her, but i am a different person entirely and this is insane."

Looks like this people from Guitar Hero/Activision are all a bunch bastards.

Yep...

'Cause who would eveeer question the credibility of Courtney Love.

--------

Guess many of you only need one side to a story, before making a judgement.

Edited November 24, 2010 by SunnyDRE

[dario27]

Some people here are really stupid.

Axl is absolutely right. It doesnt if Slash is the guitar player on Jungle, Activision had a contract with Axl and they didnt respect. Stop trying to see Axl as the vilain always, be logical. Axl had a contract with Activision and Activision didnt respect it in many ways, end of story. It doesnt matter if you think the requests Axl made on the contracts are ridiculous or not, all that matters is that there was a contract and Activision didnt respect it.

Its so simple.

That's how things works, contracts are made to be followed. It doesn't matter if you think the contract is ridiculous. Just read the document! Activision had a contract with Axl and they didn't respect it. End of story, Axl is 100% right.

not it doesn't work like that, contract needs to follow cretain regulations, not just from US but from around the world if any treaty has been signed, such as the treaty of Rome by the US which regulates all types of contracts and most of the regulations from the Berne convention... don't just burst stuff out like that and call people stupid if you don't even know what you're talking about

everyday contracts are delcared null and void by thousand of judges, everyday people get screwed, a contract isn't a guarantee of anything unless is valid

[moreblack]

It's not like some kid played the game and screamed, "Hey! That's not Robin Finck on Jungle!"

JimBob would. Scratch that, he probably DID.