Axl vs Activision

[axl8302]

I actually think Axl will get a nice settlement out of this. I really don't see it going all the way to the end but we don't know the facts too well so we'll see!

It's totally about money. He'll settle. He just wants Activision to feel some hurt it seems.

I'd do the same, they fucked with him, now he fucks with them.

[The Wicked Hand]

A verbal agreement may legaly be considered a contract, but in court its what you can PROVE. Then it becomes a hesaidshesaid stance to take. A contract you Can PROVE, there it is in writing. Thats the way i see this.

Edited July 1, 2011 by The Wicked Hand

[Bards]

I work in the entertainment industry, I'm a film producer and director... and a lot of my deals are done on verbal agreements and handshakes.

I officially don't believe you. That's just ludicrous.

[axl8302]

I work in the entertainment industry, I'm a film producer and director... and a lot of my deals are done on verbal agreements and handshakes.

I officially don't believe you. That's just ludicrous.

Well I couldn't give two shits what you believe! So how do you like those apples!

[dacian]

Axl may get some money out of this suit but I am guessing that Activision more then made their money back using Slash associated with a GnR song...probably not kosher or legal but a good business move on Activisions part

I have the same oppinion as you

[LTD]

Has Axl ever won any of the 9000+ lawsuits he has handed out? I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

Edited July 2, 2011 by LTD

[Guest NewGNRnOldGNR]

I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

There was an agreement in place obviously necessary otherwise the company in question could have just persisted with their agenda regardless of Axl’s perspective. Activison failed to uphold this agreement.

Edited July 2, 2011 by NewGNRnOldGNR

[star]

I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

There was an agreement in place obviously necessary otherwise the company in question could have just persisted with their agenda regardless of Axl’s perspective. Activison failed to uphold this agreement.

..the agreement sounds vague - Beta /Verbal

That'll be Axl's get out clause - Brazilian house maid screwed up

Edited July 3, 2011 by star

[sailaway]

Here's other examples of redistribution of the pre-1996 Guns N' Roses products in other forms, after 1996.

Wow dude, you are so out your depth in this conversation. You just don't get it.

if axl doesn't want people to associate slash with gnr, then i think the onus is on axl to get cooler guitar players and make better music than he did with slash. or at least something that's in the same general league.

also, if axl has all these specific contractual demands, he should write a contract and not allow it all to be handled in a phone call with his housekeeper. it's like he sets himself up for failure sometimes.

The onus isn't on guns, the onus is own Activision to respect and adhere to the legal contract that initially agreed to.

A verbal contact is treated exactly the same in court as a written one - it's doesn't make a difference. Business's are bought and sold on verbal contracts and handshakes. And for the record, Beta is his PA, not his housekeeper - at least not exclusively. Bounce, hater.

oh, okay sorry. then in the future, axl should have his legal contracts handled by lawyers with contracts and not a friendly phone chat with the "personal assistant / housekeeper." but it strikes me as slightly psycho that i earned "hater" status not for criticizing his music, but for criticizing the business skills of his personal assistant. sensitive much?

if you think that's a normal way that multi-million dollar contracts are negotiated, then you're as dillusional as a housekeeper who tries to manage a band.

I've read your previous posts, you're a certified hater. Like I said, many, many contracts (even multi million dollar ones) are done on the phone or with the shake of a hand. if you don't understand that, then you're naive.

What do you do for a living anyway that makes you such an expert of contract negotiation?

He is a self-appointed official e-expert

GNR can operate any fucking way it chooses,it doesn't have to meet any forum poster's agenda,and doesnt need to put up with lowlife chicanery and shenanigans from people (and alumni) who would whore them out for personal monetary gain.

[Apollo]

I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

There was an agreement in place obviously necessary otherwise the company in question could have just persisted with their agenda regardless of Axl’s perspective. Activison failed to uphold this agreement.

You hit the nail on the head. Why slash fan boys can't admit to this is beyond me.

[star]

Let the courts decide - assuming it goes that far

[Johnny Drama]

I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

There was an agreement in place obviously necessary otherwise the company in question could have just persisted with their agenda regardless of Axl’s perspective. Activison failed to uphold this agreement.

You hit the nail on the head. Why slash fan boys can't admit to this is beyond me.

1. We're not Slash fan boys, we're fans of the old band primarily (I love the new band for the most part, except for Dizzy and Ashba).

2. We're arguing this point because firstly we're not on Axl's payroll and we don't need to blow him every hour, secondly if we didn't argue it would be a batshit boring thread and finally whilst on the surface it would seem Axl is right it would be insane to think that a company the magnitude of Activision would act so negligently and act against Axl's orders. It simply doesn't add up.

[The Glow Inc.]

it would be insane to think that a company the magnitude of Activision would act so negligently and act against Axl's orders. It simply doesn't add up.

You mean the same Activision that screwed over the makers of their most valuable franchise ( Call of Duty ) and let them join Electronic Arts so they can make a better game ?

Yeah, they wouldn't do that to Axl Rose...lol

[Apollo]

I'm amazed if case this fucking stupid actually ends to his favor.

There was an agreement in place obviously necessary otherwise the company in question could have just persisted with their agenda regardless of Axl’s perspective. Activison failed to uphold this agreement.

You hit the nail on the head. Why slash fan boys can't admit to this is beyond me.

1. We're not Slash fan boys, we're fans of the old band primarily (I love the new band for the most part, except for Dizzy and Ashba).

2. We're arguing this point because firstly we're not on Axl's payroll and we don't need to blow him every hour, secondly if we didn't argue it would be a batshit boring thread and finally whilst on the surface it would seem Axl is right it would be insane to think that a company the magnitude of Activision would act so negligently and act against Axl's orders. It simply doesn't add up.

I'm a huge fan of the old band as well. My favorite band of all time as a matter of fact. But the old group of guys broke up 15 years ago. Fans being pissed off about 15 years later though is crazy. I've had people do me physical and financial harm....and I have forgiven them. But people can't get past a group of rock stars not getting along? I just don't get it.

Secondly.....what???? Because people think that Axl is right....that means they are blowing him or on his payroll? That's just an idiotic thing to say. So if YOU say something positive about Izzy does that mean you are on Izzy's payroll and you are sucking his dick?

[wasted]

if there's a contract that says you have to have a giant parrot on the cover and there isn't then they lose.

[sailaway]

if there's a contract that says you have to have a giant parrot on the cover and there isn't then they lose.

Exactly,it is cut and dry, if indeed they have broken agreements in regard to the conditional use of the song,they lose.

[Johnny Drama]

^ I get that it's cut and dry on the surface. I'm not debating that for a second. But I'm just saying there has to be more to it if Activision spoke to lawyers first, plus also if Slash was involved maybe Activision were trying to make a contract with the "band" Guns N' Roses (Axl, Slash and Duff) as opposed to the "company" Guns N' Roses (Axl).

I'm not saying Activision is innocent, maybe they did use verbal manipulation in contracts to make it seem this way (if I'm wrong with anything I've stated above, someone please correct me).

[izzydoezit]

It doesn't have to "make sense",

they felt it did.

Really? So why did they make an agreement to the contrary?

either they didn't think it was a big deal, or they didn't really agree to it. Obviously if there's legal documents involved they'll point one way or the other.

As if Axl would go to all this trouble if he didn't have proof, they fucked up (as they've done before) and it's going to cost them.

Yeah like Axl needs a good reason to sue someone..........

He and his legal team wouldn't have filed this suit and made the claims he did (like e-mails confirming no use of Velvet Revolver in the game, no license granted to use SCOM in advertising) without solid legal standing. Otherwise, the cased would be thrown out of court.

Ali

[magisme]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

magisme

[Damn_Smooth]

Fucking weird seeing the old Groghan again. Must be where bba got the idea.

[wasted]

^ I get that it's cut and dry on the surface. I'm not debating that for a second. But I'm just saying there has to be more to it if Activision spoke to lawyers first, plus also if Slash was involved maybe Activision were trying to make a contract with the "band" Guns N' Roses (Axl, Slash and Duff) as opposed to the "company" Guns N' Roses (Axl).

I'm not saying Activision is innocent, maybe they did use verbal manipulation in contracts to make it seem this way (if I'm wrong with anything I've stated above, someone please correct me).

Nothing Activision did is illegal, they just dangled something in front of Axl or his lawyers til it was too late.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

i like the reasoning that axl must be right, because he wouldn't have filed a lawsuit if he was wrong.

well, if that logic holds true, then when this case is dismissed, it must be because the judge was a slash supporter, still bitter about the break up of his favorite band.

[volcano62]

Fucking weird seeing the old Groghan again. Must be where bba got the idea.

I miss the sane Groghan

[wasted]

Atari!

[izzydoezit]

i like the reasoning that axl must be right, because he wouldn't have filed a lawsuit if he was wrong.

well, if that logic holds true, then when this case is dismissed, it must be because the judge was a slash supporter, still bitter about the break up of his favorite band.

LOL! Yeah. He probably was listening to Snakepit in his car as he was driving to court. He is a bitter ex fan!