**FAQ UPDATE IN FIRST POST 6/16** Guns N' Roses Appetite For Democracy 3D Concert Film/DVD/Blu-Ray

[alfierose]

Unpinned. Again. :-(

[D-GenerationX]

Unpinned. Again. :-(

Yeah, what's up with that?

[downzy]

Is there any actual proof of Slash blocking Axl or vice versa?

Wait, there isn't any real proof? I saw something about this in another thread, but am having a hard time finding a post that provides any evidence to this. Maybe I'm just being lazy, but does anyone have a link or even a rumour that suggests that this is being held up on the account of Slash's objections?

Then again, if this rumour proves to be true, maybe Slash saw it and is doing everyone a huge favour

Edited March 13, 2014 by downzy

[Amir]

Is there any actual proof of Slash blocking Axl or vice versa?

Wait, there isn't any real proof? I saw something about this in another thread, but am having a hard time finding a post that provides any evidence to this. Maybe I'm just being lazy, but does anyone have a link or even a rumour that suggests that this is being held up on the account of Slash's objections?

Then again, if this rumour proves to be true, maybe Slash saw it and is doing everyone a huge favour

I've been told that Slash expressly is solely responsible for the delay and is digging his heels in te ground for more revenue.... Take that as you will but it'sCome directly from 2 seperate and very reliable sources (and no, NOT Beta/Fernando!).

As in...more than was originally agreed to?

Oh sorry no I'm not privy to that but someone ****** basically emailed and said (my words just summarising!) "... Axl's done his best to get this out and get behind it but Slash is making life v awkward by blocking the licensing and further delaying the process"

His opinion was this was being done for revenue reasons only an yet the other source said it was don't to purely frustrate Axl knowing he'll be blamed for it whilst Slash comes put smelling of roses (again, this is NOT my opinion but it WAS expressed and the sources are v real)

Sorry on iPhone for typos!

That's what we've heard so far. It does seem strange that all these release dates would be announced after so many delays without getting Slash to sign off. Two different reasons for Slash's actions given by two different sources, so there's no consensus there, either.

As for proof of Axl blocking Slash releasing stuff, there is none. As Mike420 pointed out, Slash has released a lot of oldGNR songs under releases with his name (Made in Stoke, Live in Houston with VR, the Paradise City cover for the self-titled 2010 album). Not to say it hasn't happened, but it seems less likely than vice versa.

[alfierose]

Unpinned. Again. :-(

Yeah, what's up with that?

It's just sad it gets unpinned everytime something goes tits up. It's like a visual barometer of all things current GnR.

[downzy]

Is there any actual proof of Slash blocking Axl or vice versa?

Wait, there isn't any real proof? I saw something about this in another thread, but am having a hard time finding a post that provides any evidence to this. Maybe I'm just being lazy, but does anyone have a link or even a rumour that suggests that this is being held up on the account of Slash's objections?

Then again, if this rumour proves to be true, maybe Slash saw it and is doing everyone a huge favour

I've been told that Slash expressly is solely responsible for the delay and is digging his heels in te ground for more revenue.... Take that as you will but it'sCome directly from 2 seperate and very reliable sources (and no, NOT Beta/Fernando!).

As in...more than was originally agreed to?

Oh sorry no I'm not privy to that but someone ****** basically emailed and said (my words just summarising!) "... Axl's done his best to get this out and get behind it but Slash is making life v awkward by blocking the licensing and further delaying the process"

His opinion was this was being done for revenue reasons only an yet the other source said it was don't to purely frustrate Axl knowing he'll be blamed for it whilst Slash comes put smelling of roses (again, this is NOT my opinion but it WAS expressed and the sources are v real)

Sorry on iPhone for typos!

That's what we've heard so far. It does seem strange that all these release dates would be announced after so many delays without getting Slash to sign off. Two different reasons for Slash's actions given by two different sources, so there's no consensus there, either.

As for proof of Axl blocking Slash releasing stuff, there is none. As Mike420 pointed out, Slash has released a lot of oldGNR songs under releases with his name (Made in Stoke, Live in Houston with VR, the Paradise City cover for the self-titled 2010 album). Not to say it hasn't happened, but it seems less likely than vice versa.

Interesting, thanks.

Yeah, it seems a tad strange that all they would commit so much money and man hours into a project that had not received approval by Slash (where it is needed). You'd think that with all the acrimony that the biggest issue would have been handled prior to the creation and promotion of the product.

Edited March 13, 2014 by downzy

[Tom2112]

Hey guys,

Gutted it's cancelled. Was all psyched up to go

Can't blame the older members for putting a stop to this though. Axl has stopped them doing stuff countless of times too :\

Axl stopped them from licensing GnR material to a number of films... but were the films any good, I expect that the money was good but the film was probably shit and Axl didn't want to put his name or the gnr brand to it, commendable in my book. Slash, duff, Izzy everyone that has a stake in gnr music would have been paid the percentage they were owed but obviously it wasn't enough. I don't know why they would block the release it just isn't good business and will likely make things more difficult for everyone in the future.

[Iron MikeyJ]

Is there any actual proof of Slash blocking Axl or vice versa?

Wait, there isn't any real proof? I saw something about this in another thread, but am having a hard time finding a post that provides any evidence to this. Maybe I'm just being lazy, but does anyone have a link or even a rumour that suggests that this is being held up on the account of Slash's objections?

Then again, if this rumour proves to be true, maybe Slash saw it and is doing everyone a huge favour

I've been told that Slash expressly is solely responsible for the delay and is digging his heels in te ground for more revenue.... Take that as you will but it'sCome directly from 2 seperate and very reliable sources (and no, NOT Beta/Fernando!).

As in...more than was originally agreed to?

Oh sorry no I'm not privy to that but someone ****** basically emailed and said (my words just summarising!) "... Axl's done his best to get this out and get behind it but Slash is making life v awkward by blocking the licensing and further delaying the process"

His opinion was this was being done for revenue reasons only an yet the other source said it was don't to purely frustrate Axl knowing he'll be blamed for it whilst Slash comes put smelling of roses (again, this is NOT my opinion but it WAS expressed and the sources are v real)

Sorry on iPhone for typos!

That's what we've heard so far. It does seem strange that all these release dates would be announced after so many delays without getting Slash to sign off. Two different reasons for Slash's actions given by two different sources, so there's no consensus there, either.

As for proof of Axl blocking Slash releasing stuff, there is none. As Mike420 pointed out, Slash has released a lot of oldGNR songs under releases with his name (Made in Stoke, Live in Houston with VR, the Paradise City cover for the self-titled 2010 album). Not to say it hasn't happened, but it seems less likely than vice versa.

Which that's my whole thing, we have NO EVIDENCE that Axl has ever prevented Slash from releasing things (that doesn't mean it hasn't happened), but if it did at least Axl was reasonable, let him release some stuff. From what we have heard, via our UK Subs, Slash has blocked this release. I'm sorry but as a fan of Slash, this really pisses me off. No matter what his reason, as a fan of gnr (old and new) he fucked me today...

Now if he was to return to gnr tomorrow, all would be forgiven, but as far as his solo material goes, I'm done...

[Black Sabbath]

It's been unpinned because it's kind of at a standstill right now, and people were discussing the Slash stuff too much in this thread when we want you to use the "Thanks to nobody" thread for that.

[Naupis]

as a fan of gnr (old and new) he fucked me today...

Axl is the one you should be mad at.

He fucked you when he decided to keep a band name in which he needed Slash to sign off on stuff for it.

Possibly the worst business model I have ever seen. Axl runs a nostalgia business that he doesn't even have the rights to do as he'd wish with.

He should get out of the tribute band business and back into music at some point the way the other members have. Then these types of things wouldn't be such an issue.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Are we finally seeing the truth that is $la$h?

This pans out, its a big day for rabid Slash haters and/or total Axl zealots. No question.

But it's a sad day for GN'R fans.

It's the most stupid shit Slash could come up with. Why is it so hard for them to grasp the idea that as they try to destroy and hurt each other, they are actually doing exactly that to their fans?

Edited March 13, 2014 by Scumcat Esq.

[Iron MikeyJ]

as a fan of gnr (old and new) he fucked me today...

Axl is the one you should be mad at.

He fucked you when he decided to keep a band name in which he needed Slash to sign off on stuff for it.

Possibly the worst business model I have ever seen. Axl runs a nostalgia business that he doesn't even have the rights to do as he'd wish with.

He should get out of the tribute band business and back into music at some point the way the other members have. Then these types of things wouldn't be such an issue.

Hey I pretty much agree with all of that, but I've had how many years to accept that? I haven't been a fan since day 1, but early 90's for sure. I was VERY upset during most of the 90's with Axl. I'm not going to lie, Axl has always been my favorite member, but I LOVED all of them, and the Illusion guys. I would very much want a reunion over ANYTHING including CD2, but Axl did win me over with CD and seeing him live. In a sense I became a fan of NUgnr the old fashion way, by listening to the album and going to the concerts. I very much get frustrated with Axl, quite often, but I guess I've become sort of numb to a lot of it. I do not have any dillusions that Nugnr has performed a single classic gnr song better than the old band did, because I just haven't seen it. But if we are to live in a world where classic gnr is no more, than by default Nugnr have become one of my favorite bands (classic would be #1, but nu is top 10). Plus as I have said, I do like the music they are making, it's very good rock music imo, and Axl even today, is better than most. But honestly not many are making good rock anymore, and as of now Axl has never released a bad album imo.

[D-GenerationX]

Are we finally seeing the truth that is $la$h?

This pans out, its a big day for rabid Slash haters and/or total Axl zealots. No question.

But it's a sad day for GN'R fans.

It's the most stupid shit Slash could come up with. Why is it so hard for them to grasp the idea that as they try to destroy and hurt each other, they are actually doing exactly that to their fans?

Its dumb on Slash's part, because it opens up the can of "you are no better than Axl."

Now, is that accurate? Could you make the argument that this one poor decision doesn't exactly equal all the crap Axl has done over the years? Sure.

But why even go down this road?

[jonah]

Are we sure it's Slash and not Steven Adler wanting a cut

[Apollo]

Still confused at how you people can make character judgments about Slash because of this, without knowing what the facts are.

If Axl and Beta offered him $3.50 for the rights to use (and for them to make a profit off of) songs that he owns publishing rights to - then how would Slash be the bad guy in that situation? I know some of you weirdly hate Slash just because Axl does, but how about waiting for the actual facts before you crucify the guy?

[TheSeeker]

Are we sure it's Slash and not Steven Adler wanting a cut

Slash, Axl, and Duff are the only remaining members with any rights to the band's likeness

[phaeryen]

Still confused at how you people can make character judgments about Slash because of this, without knowing what the facts are.

If Axl and Beta offered him $3.50 for the rights to use (and for them to make a profit off of) songs that he owns publishing rights to - then how would Slash be the bad guy in that situation? I know some of you weirdly hate Slash just because Axl does, but how about waiting for the actual facts before you crucify the guy?

ETA on facts arriving?

Don't tell people to wait for stuff that we won't see anyway.

[Apollo]

Still confused at how you people can make character judgments about Slash because of this, without knowing what the facts are.

If Axl and Beta offered him $3.50 for the rights to use (and for them to make a profit off of) songs that he owns publishing rights to - then how would Slash be the bad guy in that situation? I know some of you weirdly hate Slash just because Axl does, but how about waiting for the actual facts before you crucify the guy?

ETA on facts arriving?

Don't tell people to wait for stuff that we won't see anyway.

I'm sure Axl and Beta will release a statement to the fans any minute now.

[DieselDaisy]

Still confused at how you people can make character judgments about Slash because of this, without knowing what the facts are.

If Axl and Beta offered him $3.50 for the rights to use (and for them to make a profit off of) songs that he owns publishing rights to - then how would Slash be the bad guy in that situation? I know some of you weirdly hate Slash just because Axl does, but how about waiting for the actual facts before you crucify the guy?

ETA on facts arriving?

Don't tell people to wait for stuff that we won't see anyway.

I'm sure Axl and Beta will release a statement to the fans any minute now.

'You sure'?

[Axl_morris]

Slash should be greatful for the $3.50

Unless it was a performance of which he was in. It was't though, and the songs arent the same, the new guitarists add there own style and keysboards are added etc.

Slash was paid for his songs when the album came out. He willingly signed the name over to axl and quit the band.

My rant is more toward the laws that exist being complete bullshit than a direct dig at slash.

Tell me something groghan, do you still prophet from a job you previously had? Do you still get paid for a days work you did 25 years ago that someone else is doing?

Edited March 13, 2014 by Axl_morris

[DieselDaisy]

Slash should be greatful for the $3.50

Unless it was a performance of which he was in. It was't though, and the songs arent the same, the new guitarists add there own style and keysboards are added etc.

Slash was paid for his songs when the album came out. He willingly signed the name over to axl and quit the band.

My rant is more toward the laws that exist being complete bullshit than a direct dig at slash.

Tell me something groghan, do you still prophet from a job you previously had? Do you still get paid for a days work you did 25 years ago that someone else is doing?

The music industry does not work like that. Song publishing is in many ways a seperate sphere from performance. When Slash signed over the name, he did not sign over his publishing. If a kid today buys a copy of Appetite, it is perfectly right that a percentage of that should go to Slash and not, DJ Ashba.

[Yesterdays-Civil-War]

Still confused at how you people can make character judgments about Slash because of this, without knowing what the facts are.

If Axl and Beta offered him $3.50 for the rights to use (and for them to make a profit off of) songs that he owns publishing rights to - then how would Slash be the bad guy in that situation? I know some of you weirdly hate Slash just because Axl does, but how about waiting for the actual facts before you crucify the guy?

I didn't know Slash was an eight-story tall Crustacean from the Paleolithic Era.

[Axl_morris]

Slash should be greatful for the $3.50

Unless it was a performance of which he was in. It was't though, and the songs arent the same, the new guitarists add there own style and keysboards are added etc.

Slash was paid for his songs when the album came out. He willingly signed the name over to axl and quit the band.

My rant is more toward the laws that exist being complete bullshit than a direct dig at slash.

Tell me something groghan, do you still prophet from a job you previously had? Do you still get paid for a days work you did 25 years ago that someone else is doing?

The music industry does not work like that. Song publishing is in many ways a seperate sphere from performance. When Slash signed over the name, he did not sign over his publishing. If a kid today buys a copy of Appetite, it is perfectly right that a percentage of that should go to Slash and not, DJ Ashba.

I agree when it comes to appetite for destruction.

I dont agree with him profiting from a show that he never played at and left the band. There is no official material on the dvd. Its a live performance. Is it only america specigic though? Or did axl profit from europe sales of slashs dvd and velvet revolver ep on itunes?

[DieselDaisy]

Slash should be greatful for the $3.50

Unless it was a performance of which he was in. It was't though, and the songs arent the same, the new guitarists add there own style and keysboards are added etc.

Slash was paid for his songs when the album came out. He willingly signed the name over to axl and quit the band.

My rant is more toward the laws that exist being complete bullshit than a direct dig at slash.

Tell me something groghan, do you still prophet from a job you previously had? Do you still get paid for a days work you did 25 years ago that someone else is doing?

The music industry does not work like that. Song publishing is in many ways a seperate sphere from performance. When Slash signed over the name, he did not sign over his publishing. If a kid today buys a copy of Appetite, it is perfectly right that a percentage of that should go to Slash and not, DJ Ashba.

I agree when it comes to appetite for destruction.

I dont agree with him profiting from a show that he never played at and left the band. There is no official material on the dvd. Its a live performance. Is it only america specigic though? Or did axl profit from europe sales of slashs dvd and velvet revolver ep on itunes?

The term here, is ''intellectual property'' (as distinct from, tangible property, e.g. mechanical rights). The 'Welcome to Jungle' riff remains Slash's, intellectual property, regardless of whoever plays it. Even when Slash is deceased, the work will still remain the intellectual property of the heirs to Slash’s estate for a long period of time.

Edited March 13, 2014 by DieselDaisy

[ohlovelyrita]

as a fan of gnr (old and new) he fucked me today...

Axl is the one you should be mad at.

He fucked you when he decided to keep a band name in which he needed Slash to sign off on stuff for it.

Possibly the worst business model I have ever seen. Axl runs a nostalgia business that he doesn't even have the rights to do as he'd wish with.

He should get out of the tribute band business and back into music at some point the way the other members have. Then these types of things wouldn't be such an issue.

Explain why Axl should give up the band name if:

1) He never left

2) It's named after him

3) He named it

4) He doesn't want to be a solo artist, he wants to continue his vision

(reposting)

I read this Chaunce Hayden interview ('01) in a magazine:

CH: Do you miss Guns N' Roses?

Slash: No. We had a fucking great time. The Guns N' Roses days were a blast! But you can't recreate it after a certain point. The lineup in the band had depleted so much. I just realized I couldn't keep doing it anymore. So I just split while it was still cool. (Laughs) You know?

CH: What's your opinion of Axl Rose?

Slash: I haven't talked to him since I quit. That puts that concept to rest.

CH:There has to be more to the story than that.

Slash: No, its pretty simple. He was heading in one direction and I was heading in another.It was actually a slow progression from the days when we first made a record all the way up to the final record. When our last tour ended, he made it clear which way he wanted to go musically. I tried to hang on and stay with the band as long as I could, but there was definatly limitations. It just got to the point where we couldnt work together anymore.

CH:How do you feel about Axl continuing to tour as Guns N' Roses?

Slash: Axl is making the call for whatever his 3 percent of the band is worth. He's making the call these days. My life was just miserable then. I couldn't deal with it. So I just left. So when he wanted to use the name Guns N' Roses I said sure, I didn't want anything to do with it.