Something New To Try

[rocky]

I went to the ASCAP webpage and searched for new songs by looking up songwriting credits for axl and the rest of the band.  Unfortunately, there was nothing new there.  I did, however, find something under the publishers/administrators section of the search page.  When I typed in Guns N' roses, this came up:

GUNS N' ROSES MUSIC
    % SUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
    ATTN: CHARLES SUSSMAN
    1222 16 AVE SOUTH
    THIRD FLOOR
    NASHVILLE , TN, 37212
    Tel. (615) 320-9161

I don't know if its still valid, or if its even affiliated with the band anymore, but I figured if someone is interested in calling/writing them it wouldn't hurt.  

[jarmo]

Writing a law firm?

I guess they're just handling GN'R's song publishing stuff.



/jarmo

[Chief]

as far as i know they only publish new song info, etc. on there after it is released.

[kockstar99]

someone mail them or call them and ask them what the fuck is up with GnR and what the fuck they have to do with GnR.

[SlashFan]

someone mail them or call them and ask them what the fuck is up with GnR and what the fuck they have to do with GnR.

yeah!

[pilferk]

No.

First off, with attorney/clilent privilege it would be illegal for them to discuss GnR. Period.

Second, since they are probably copyright attorney's, they know that prior to publication, releasing information on any material currently "in the pipeline" could endanger their claims at copyright.

Thirdly, you're more likely to piss the law firm off than to get any real answers from them.  "Harassing" a law firm, even for information, is not usually the best action to take.

[Will]

Actually I have a question related to that...we may have already covered that but here it is:

It's concerning the new songs: it appears that none of the new songs (including Madagascar, The Blues & co.) have been copyrighted yet (at least in public records). Does it mean that any artist/ band could basically listen to a recent bootleg, record say Madagascar (same lyrics/ same music), then copyright it without getting in trouble?? If the band has not registered the songs, they would have no legal resort right?
I'm pretty sure they have copyrighted the songs already but those records are not available to the public. What do you guys think?

[the dirt]

Actually I have a question related to that...we may have already covered that but here it is:

It's concerning the new songs: it appears that none of the new songs (including Madagascar, The Blues & co.) have been copyrighted yet (at least in public records). Does it mean that any artist/ band could basically listen to a recent bootleg, record say Madagascar (same lyrics/ same music), then copyright it without getting in trouble?? If the band has not registered the songs, they would have no legal resort right?
I'm pretty sure they have copyrighted the songs already but those records are not available to the public. What do you guys think?

hmm..  Remember Offspring 'joking' as it turns out, about releasing an album called Chinese Democracy?

No one knows if GNR's actually really exists, it has just apparently been in the works for years. But nonetheless, Axl threatened to sue. I'm not sure if Offspring backed down and said it was a joke out of fear, or that they just wanted to throw some salt in Axl's wounds... and were never really intent on calling their album that.

I didn't really see the problem with them using the album title, cos theirs would have been out before his anyways.

The songs may be a different story, who knows. Interesting though

[pilferk]

Actually I have a question related to that...we may have already covered that but here it is:

It's concerning the new songs: it appears that none of the new songs (including Madagascar, The Blues & co.) have been copyrighted yet (at least in public records). Does it mean that any artist/ band could basically listen to a recent bootleg, record say Madagascar (same lyrics/ same music), then copyright it without getting in trouble?? If the band has not registered the songs, they would have no legal resort right?
I'm pretty sure they have copyrighted the songs already but those records are not available to the public. What do you guys think?

OK, first, let me preface with I'm not an attorney.  

Copyright law is pretty complex. From what I understand, until publishing, you don't have to register your works with the "official copyright database" (for lack of a better term).  You only have to turn over copies of the works, either on paper or in recorded format, to your attorney to prove copyright. Your attorney doesn't register them, it just serves as "proof", from a legal perspective, that the works were created by you, and protects your rights in relation to them. Even if you didn't, if you had some sort of documentation that could prove you created the works PRIOR to anyone else publishing them, you can establish that you own the copyright to that work. There's been several high profile suits to that effect.  So, to answer your question: No, someone else could not just "re-record" one of the new songs and claim it as their own.  Hell, the bootleg alone would be proof enough that you were not the original creator of the work.

[pilferk]

Actually I have a question related to that...we may have already covered that but here it is:

It's concerning the new songs: it appears that none of the new songs (including Madagascar, The Blues & co.) have been copyrighted yet (at least in public records). Does it mean that any artist/ band could basically listen to a recent bootleg, record say Madagascar (same lyrics/ same music), then copyright it without getting in trouble?? If the band has not registered the songs, they would have no legal resort right?
I'm pretty sure they have copyrighted the songs already but those records are not available to the public. What do you guys think?

hmm..  Remember Offspring 'joking' as it turns out, about releasing an album called Chinese Democracy?

No one knows if GNR's actually really exists, it has just apparently been in the works for years. But nonetheless, Axl threatened to sue. I'm not sure if Offspring backed down and said it was a joke out of fear, or that they just wanted to throw some salt in Axl's wounds... and were never really intent on calling their album that.

I didn't really see the problem with them using the album title, cos theirs would have been out before his anyways.

The songs may be a different story, who knows. Interesting though

Again, prefacing with "I'm not an attorney".

With album titles, it's clear cut: The album has to be published OR the band has to have toured using the name.  Remember what the '02 tour was called?  That's why the Offspring could have gotten sued.

[Will]

Thanx for the info pilferk, I didn't know that!
I was a bit worried that anyone could steal the band's songs but apparently it couldn't happen so that's good to know.

[the dirt]

Fair enough with the album naming issue..

I'm forgetting when exactly the offspring said they were going to name their album CD. Wasn't it before that 2002 tour? I may be mistaken...

And there are albums out there with the same names; big groups too, not only an album that sells 5k copies compared with a bigger band that sells 5mill. The bigger band probably wouldn't care with the popularity/fame differential. What about 2 big bands with the same album name, as has occured many times. Does the 2end group with the same album name have to pay some $$ for using the same name as the group who titled theirs first?
 

[Will]

I'm forgetting when exactly the offspring said they were going to name their album CD. Wasn't it before that 2002 tour? I may be mistaken...

It was in March 2003.

[Skunk]

i was under the impression that you can not copyright a title?

also (and i only really know what i know about copyright law through publishing, books not music), but legally whatever you make is copyrighted to you the moment it is created. that's what copyright is. however, registering it officially allows for greater legal recourse. so for example if someone steals your work, you can go to court to stop them as long as you can prove it is rightfully your work, however if you have it registered and legally copyrighted, you would stop them and also be able to seek monetary compensation from them. so in that sense i don't think GNR has to worry about anyone stealing their songs, as it's pretty easy to prove they wrote them.