Jump to content

Fortus on Slash & Duff: 'I Think We All Agree It Clicked Instantly' [Update Page 7 - ''I Don't Think This Band Has Ever Sounded Better Than It Does Right Now'']


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, JustanUrchin said:

On the eve of what would appear to be exciting news for Gn’R fans (Izzy and Adler, and perhaps one or more new tunes?)—news that may bring me (and many others) back into the fold—it seems time to dust off legal facts.

 

The o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l Guns n’ Roses is the five individuals who signed a recording contract with Geffen, registered their biz entity as a general p’ship with the California DOS, trademarked the brand (band), and wrote, recorded and copyrighted the first Gn’R album.

 

There is thus no other o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l Gn’R than Slash, Duff, Izzy, Adler and Axl.  This is legal fact.  Any other assertion is a legal impossibility, and thus, false.

 

Anyone who attempts to claim otherwise (while seeking pecuniary benefit) would first receive a cease-and-desist letter, and if said party/ies continued to infringe upon copyrighted or trademarked images or sounds or claims of being “original” to the band, said party/ies would be sued.  Ask yourself, then, who—what entity—can enforce and protect the rights of Gn’R copyrighted and trademarked material?  Further, ask yourself why Axl could n-e-v-e-r license this biz entity’s product—its images, marks and sounds (in other words, said images, marks and sounds owned by the S/D/A p’ship that had been created by the S/D/I/A/A p’ship)?

 

Subsequent to Adler being fired, S/D/A purchased Izzy’s equity share/capital account (with their individual cash) when Izzy withdrew from the p’ship in ‘91, and thereafter formed a new p’ship—the S/D/A p’ship.  During this period, however, Axl, legally secured the exclusive right to the brand name—Guns n’ Roses.  Soapy Smith would’ve been proud of such maneuvering—albeit Mr. Smith swindled presumably sober individuals.

 

With brand name in tow, Axl ventured to continue his raging dictatorial delusions, and “employ” both Slash and Duff in Axl’s solo band.  Said solo band, and Axl in his individual capacity, had sole legal right to the use (historical misuse) of the brand name moving forward.  Slash said, in legal effect, “fuck off” in ’96 and Duff said, in legal effect, “fuck off” in ’97.

 

-----------------------------

 

The legal and end results?  The legal result was that Axl retained a brand name for two decades by which he apparently supported himself, his live-ins, and work-for-hire musicians during those two decades by touring under said brand name while performing S/D/A p’ship tunes.  To some degree, anyhow.  One of his former employees, a keyboardist, sued him for failing to pay him for work performed.  Axl attempted to use or license p’ship material during that time, and was met with S/D litigation, which resulted, in part, in Axl “re-recording” AFD.  As ridiculous (and desperate) as that may seem to “re-record” an iconic album, he could not legally/financially benefit/control that material unless he did so (while paying the p’ship/copyrighted artists).  Axl also released 15 songs in 25 years with his solo band, 14 of which landed on Wikipedia’s worst-ever albums.  Over those two decades, Slash and Duff controlled whether and when and for what price (2/3 vote majority vote) any S/D/A asset would be licensed or otherwise used (the original/lucrative Gn’R assets—licensing, merchandising, etc.).  Slash and Duff (and Izzy and even Adler), meanwhile, pumped out new tune after new tune during those two decades.  Slash and Duff (and Sorum) also won Grammies.

 

The question then becomes, beyond the arguably unparalleled embarrassment and train wreck that Axl was for a quarter-century in which he hired and fired musicians, managers and promoters like one would expect of Mao, and blew through outrageous recording advances like Monopoly money as the standby butt of late-night talk show and peer musician mockery—when has Axl controlled ANYTHING other than the brand name and his employees in his two-decade solo band, its music (or lack thereof), and touring of said solo band?

 

Stated differently, Axl doesn’t control shit.  He never did.  It’s myth propagated by Axl apologists.  Myth and near-delusional horseshit that is crushed by legal fact.  Axl legally owned, at least until January 1, 2016, the brand name.  Any and all legally relevant fact since that time support an amended, modified or new S/D/A p’ship agreement.  While I have neither the time nor inclination to recite it, you may, if so inclined, search my prior posts as they are few and all relevant to the topic are supported and sourced by legally relevant, current fact. 

 

Axl has always been legally controlled, after Izzy’s w/drawl from the p’ship, by Slash and Duff.  Axl is further controlled, and marginalized, since January 1, 2016.  By what?  A quarter-of-a-billion-dollar grossing biz entity (and growing) being administered and controlled by Live Nation, a conglomerate with many subsidiaries (including the publishing house Roc Nation—promoting new Gn’R music?), Slash’s separate management (and counsel), Duff’s separate management (and counsel), and Axl’s separate live-in management and familial accounting.  Again, refer to my sparse prior posts for supporting and sourced fact.  Axl is, moreover, controlled by specific division of loss terms, assuredly forced upon him by S/D’s counsel AND Live Nation.  This controls not only his behavior on-stage (zero diva hissy-fits and zero criminal behavior like inciting riots) but his timeliness and legally FORCED respect for paying consumers of the S/D/A product—ticketing for live performances and a beastly killing on merchandising, and licensing, e.g., NASCAR).

 

While maynard, Sunset Gardner, Free Bird, todreamofwolves, and the dude/dudette with the string of numbers name are mowing down the Axl apologist propaganda, an additional hand never hurts.  Apologies in advance if I’m missing any others stating legally relevant facts as I‘ve scrolled through just the last few pages.  And yes, feel free to cut and paste anything from this post above the ------------ as it is legal fact, and because I rarely post on Gn’R boards but am routinely asked in PM’s if copying from my posts is cool.  Hell, yeah!  Rock the fuck on.  Axl apologist propaganda bullshit has no place on these boards post-January 1, 2016, if it ever did.

 

Regarding Izzy’s whatever-the-number replacement, who apparently was the subject of this thread, this guy is in his 50’s and has zero known riffs.  I repeat.  The guy is in his 50’s, is a guitarist, and no one knows him from a can of paint.  The guy feeds his family by playing Izzy’s chords and attempting to look like Izzy.  Hell, even Adler mistook him for Izzy from a distance.  He has, though, recorded and/or toured with Rihanna and NSYNC.  Izzy would be rolling in his grave, if he were in one, like the rest of us Gn’R fans who saw the o-r-g-i-n-a-l band.

 

Then again, Izzy is ready, willing and able.  But S/D/A are bathing in ticketing and merchandising to the tune of a quarter of a billion before we get into NASCAR licensing and so forth, and (perhaps until tomorrow), refuse to split the loot with Izzy as they tour on the backs of songs that he co-wrote.

Great post.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what I am getting from this thread is that Axl dissolved the partnership that was behind the band Guns n' Roses and created a new business entity to run behind Guns n' Roses. Duff and Slash joined this this entity as non-partners then later bugged out since they had better things to do.

I am kind of lost on what this has to do with Fortus. But that is okay. I'd rather stay out of that rabbit hole. You all keep on having fun.

 

 

Edited by sanity_lost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎23‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 10:51 PM, AxlRoseCDII said:

Funny, didn't seem to mention LA Guns. That's not exactly the discussion here. It's fine if you want to pretend a fact doesn't exist or you have your own set of standards, but CD is most definitely a Guns album. It's 100% a fact. Band members get replaced. There are bands out there with no original members. 

 

You didn't answer my question.

What if we apply your logic to the LA Guns situation.  Which is the real LA Guns ?

None.  They are both travesties of the real deal.  Just like 'GNR'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎23‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 11:00 PM, Sosso said:

You may have heard about them. They had dolphins in their music videos and wrote a song about democracy in China.

That band is defunct in case you didn't know. 

They sure as hell never wrote a song about democracy in China.

The singer did though, on his solo album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Nikki_Sixx said:

You didn't answer my question.

What if we apply your logic to the LA Guns situation.  Which is the real LA Guns ?

None.  They are both travesties of the real deal.  Just like 'GNR'.

The current line-up of L.A. Guns is great. Probably the best since the early 90's. 

10 minutes ago, Nikki_Sixx said:

That band is defunct in case you didn't know. 

They sure as hell never wrote a song about democracy in China.

The singer did though, on his solo album.

 cover-medium_large_file.png

 

Edited by Sosso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,

Fortus is an absolute MASTER in term of songwriting, I just saw this video with the Dead Daisies, the man knows how to WRITE, he sounds like he is possessed by Jeff Beck or Lynyrd Skynyrd...

Richard is the "secret weapon" of Guns N' Roses.

 

 

 

Edited by Sunset Boulevard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Sunset Boulevard said:

Guys,

Fortus is an absolute MASTER in term of songwriting, I just saw this video with the Dead Daisies, the man knows how to WRITE, he sounds like he is possessed by Jeff Beck or Lynyrd Skynyrd...

Richard is the "secret weapon" of Guns N' Roses.

giphy.gif

  • Like 3
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...