Slash & Duff to sue Axl! part 2 (New info in Slash/Duff lawsuit)

[killingvector]

we need to hear axl's rebuttal brief before making a decison as to who is right and who is wrong. Slash and duff could be completely off base here.

[blues_rock_axeman]

FROM THE LEGAL PAPERS:

"His (Axl's) capricious actions are motivated by a conflict of interest and...deprives the fans of Guns N' Roses music..."

They actually filed the truth through a law court?! Crazy times...

Hell, the band even came to be known on those documents as 'Axl's GNR'...the document calls this Axl's GNR merely an Axl solo project...

I very much doubt this fills the likes of Finck and Stinson with the maximum of faith in Guns N' Roses, does it? They'll be forever known now as 'Axl's GNR'...

[Acquiesce]

I wonder if Slash & Duff will be able to release old footage of the band if they win.

[Continental Drift]

Blues_Rock_Axeman,

Sorry, but I personally see this further delaying Chinese Democracy not speeding it up. Axl's stake in the GN'R back catalog is probably the most valuable thing he owns. Although I don't see even the worst case scenario being THAT detrimental to him... I still think he will want to fight like HELL to preserve the discretionary power he currently posesses. All accounts point to Axl being someone who gets 100% focused/immersed into his legal matters. I also believe Axl's attorneys will advise Axl that it would be unwise to release a new album under the moniker of Guns N' Roses when the terms of the purchase of that very moniker (more specifically other limited rights aside from the name itself) are being debated (and potentially re-interpreted) in court. I could be wrong, but I think this pushes CD back rather than accelerates it.

[blues_rock_axeman]

Blues_Rock_Axeman,

Sorry, but I personally see this further delaying Chinese Democracy not speeding it up. Axl's stake in the GN'R back catalog is probably the most valuable thing he owns. Although I don't see even the worst case scenario being THAT detrimental to him... I still think he will want to fight like HELL to preserve the discretionary power he currently posesses. All accounts point to Axl being someone who gets 100% focused/immersed into his legal matters. I also believe Axl's attorneys will advise Axl that it would be unwise to release a new album under the moniker of Guns N' Roses when the terms of the purchase of that very moniker (more specifically other limited rights aside from the name itself) are being debated (and potentially re-interpreted) in court. I could be wrong, but I think this pushes CD back rather than accelerates it.

Ah, point taken and fully understood.  

[madagas]

Mao, nothing in that Complaint says they are contesting Axl's right to use the name for his new band-NOTHING. Again, Geffen has paid out 13 million to fund a Gnr record. Unless they are complete idiots and did not understand Axl's rights-they may obviously be- then it should have no effect on Chinese, other than taking up Axl's time. God knows, we don't need Geffen jumping in the suit as well. Without reading the exhibits attached to the complaint and having Axl's answer, speculation is futile.

[Sillything]

All legal bullshit aside...How can they do this to each other? It's very hurting for a long time fan. I don't even wanna listen to the records anymore. Atleast that's what it feels like on sad day like this

[Booker Floyd]

I also believe Axl's attorneys will advise Axl that it would be unwise to release a new album under the moniker of Guns N' Roses when the terms of the purchase of that very moniker (more specifically other limited rights aside from the name itself) are being debated (and potentially re-interpreted) in court. I could be wrong, but I think this pushes CD back rather than accelerates it.

I doubt it...

As you know, the name isnt the issue discussed in the suit.  It seems to be understood that Axl is the owner and manager of post-1996 GNR, so anything released under the name that doesnt involve Original GNR material shouldnt be a problem at all.  The matter pertains exclusively to the old material and its manaegment.

The best thing that would come out of this, however, would hopefully be the release of "new" old material, including video footage (possibly the hours of tour footage Duff discussed) and maybe even the original, less-produced Use Your Illusions.

[charl!edontsurf]

You get called the "Most Dangerous Band in the World" for a reason. Who knew you could hit the self destruct button more than once.

[Continental Drift]

I think you guys are missing my point. You're right. All parties agree that Axl owns the name "Guns N' Roses". What I'm speculating is that there must be some sort of additional language in that purchase agreement/Axl departure from Partnership Agreement (ie other additional limited rights) that has led Axl and his attorneys over the years to assert that he has "discretionary veto power" over the back catalog- or at the very least has retained a level of discretionary power greater than that of a "Terminated Partner". There must be something there- that's probably full of legal jargon- that has permitted Slash and Duff to seemingly go along with this arrangement for 9 years. If Axl's departure from the partnership and subsequent relegation to "Terminated Partner" was as cut and dry as their complaint portrays then they certainly would have been ALL OVER this in the intervening years when Axl was voting against licenses left and right.

Again, my suspicion is that Slash and Duff are probably working with different lawyers than they were working with in 1995. Their new legal team probably saw an "open window" in the language of Axl's departure/name purchase agreements that Slash and Duff's previous attorneys either did not see or did not deem worthy of pursuing.

I agree with you guys that for the moment- it's not the mere fact that Axl owns the name that's the determining factor- it's what other limited rights if any did he receive or did he in fact receive nothing other than the name and we have a situation that Slash and Duff have been basically sitting around failing to enforce the contract for nine years.

Lastly, this is hardly an ordinary case. I would not be surprised at all if the judge may struggle to find enough appropriate case law to rule on this matter. If that is indeed the case, you better believe that the fact that Axl has owned the name Guns N' Roses for nearly 10 years,  has appeared on stage and released music ("Oh My God") under that moniker and has been a party in other legal proceedings/negotiations (Rock In Rio/Clear Channel/2002 Tour) etc. under that name will appear to create a hell of a lot more substantial claim to at least "preserving" his 1/3's discretionary power than anything Duff and Slash can assemble to say he should be relegated back to "Terminated Partner" status. So the purchase of the name could still factor largely. I just don't have enough of an understanding of CA case law to know if this will be the case though. Just saying keep an eye on it.

[Continental Drift]

I'm gonna bow out for a little while. I think people are tired of my wordy responses. But I think the debate currently on this thread is pretty much how both sides are going to approach this. Slash/Duff will argue Axl vacated his old GN'R partnership rights (including discretionary control of the back catalog) with his departure from the partnership in '95 and Axl defending himself with some clause or language in his departure agreement or name purchase agreement saying that was not entirely true and attempting to supplement his argument with more "extraneous" issues like his subsequent ownership and use of the brand name, the elapsed time that Slash/Duff have not enforced their rights and the potential absence of relavent case law specific to this situation.

As a GN'R fan I'm bummed. As a future law student... I'm fascinated. Enjoyed all your comments guys. This could really go anywhere. Hopefully it gets resolved soon with minimal damage to all parties, whom we all care a great deal about.

[questdex]

hello, I've been involved with many lawsuits, mostly as the planitiff, and I can veify this:

If we could see the attachments and they say what is claimed...

1)Slash and Duff will be able to use the old music/videos, live stuff any way they want...Axl won't be able to use any of it.

2)They are claiming the gnr "partnership" (which owns all the old stuff), is them.

3)There will be a big punitiver damage award, because the judge will look at what they made from 85- Dec 95, and base the damages on the potentisal they might have made from 95-2004....this could be huge...it could be 100mil, or it could be just the proven times offers were made and falssly represented their "partnership" and turned down $$...Minimum it would be 1 million.  I'm gonna guess 5-10mil though.

4)They will be able to re-record, delete, do anything they want with all the old stuff, and sell it as they wish....

5)They will be able to Sue Axl for using scom on big daddy cause he altered the "partnerships" music and published it without their consent.


6)The only question I'm not sure about is wheather or not Axl will be paid for any selling or licencing the old "partnership" does....


7)The 249.50 on the front is the price to file in cali court for a case of this type.

8)If Slash and Duff win, they get all the old music, rights, says, and axl will have to pay punitive damages, could be huge, and for their lawyers costs for the trial.


9)Axl should leave all the old shit alone..I think from the evidence here he probably is out of the "partnership", which owns all the old stuff...

Axls only hope is to immediatly promote for 2 moinths, then releace CD, and actually show up to concerts....

Hell make millions, have enough to pay the damages from this suit, and plenty left over....

I think however, hell fight the suit, lose, not pay, have all thge old gnr stuff/rights and his personal property repo'd....

then not release CD in the next 5 years....

after that amount of time no one will care....

right now theres only a few hundred thousand internet fans that care...and mabey 2 mil casual fans that might buy stuff...look at greatest hits...

[madagas]

 

[ppbebe]

then not release CD in the next 5 years....
after that amount of time no one will care....

Somehow, I doubt it?

[SLCPUNK]

Why the rolled eyes? The person made sense to me.

Unless I'm missing something.

[SLCPUNK]

then not release CD in the next 5 years....
after that amount of time no one will care....

Somehow, I doubt it?

Why is this so far fetched? Especially since he hasn't shown any sign of releasing it at all?

[Naupis]

I think whoever said Slash and Duff are working with a new legal team is right on the mark. I am going to bet this was a fresh set of lawyers who recently made this discovery and then went for the kill. And it was probably most definitely discovered when the whole greatest hits lawsuit was filed because they probably had to look through all the old contract/agreements to see what they could have done to stop the GH release.


Frankly I think it would be great if a judge awarded Slash/Duff full control of the partnership they never resigned from and giant punitive damages. Axl has spent his life making sly/sometimes underhanded legal manuvers to get what he wants, and it would be nice to see the tables turn on him. Then maybe he will begin to feel the hurt the other guys see as he trots his version of GNR out there while the others sit idley by and watch. He would then have to sit there and not control his own bands back catalog because his greed for total control went one step too far when he resigned from that partnership. Maybe this is the kick in the ass he has needed and has had coming.

[Booker Floyd]

I'm gonna bow out for a little while. I think people are tired of my wordy responses.

Actually, you and Naupis' posts are much appreciated (by myself, anyway) and have raised the standard of discussion on here substantially.  Theyre infintely better than the "Boycott Contraband"-variety posts.

[privatereserve]

Is anybody here a Attorney?  Does SLASH AND DUFF have a real case here or not?  I've read through it and I'm not a attorney so I don't know.

[SLCPUNK]

I think whoever said Slash and Duff are working with a new legal team is right on the mark. I am going to bet this was a fresh set of lawyers who recently made this discovery and then went for the kill. And it was probably most definitely discovered when the whole greatest hits lawsuit was filed because they probably had to look through all the old contract/agreements to see what they could have done to stop the GH release.


Frankly I think it would be great if a judge awarded Slash/Duff full control of the partnership they never resigned from and giant punitive damages. Axl has spent his life making sly/sometimes underhanded legal manuvers to get what he wants, and it would be nice to see the tables turn on him. Then maybe he will begin to feel the hurt the other guys see as he trots his version of GNR out there while the others sit idley by and watch. He would then have to sit there and not control his own bands back catalog because his greed for total control went one step too far when he resigned from that partnership. Maybe this is the kick in the ass he has needed and has had coming.

You hit the nail right on the head. I think this is probably the case, or darn close to it. It would explain the timing of it all as well. I highly doubt that these guys are two faced bastards (that people are implying) using this suit for PR as well as greed. I just don't believe it. Somebody (ie lawyers during GH) went through all the paperwork and then one day left a message on their machine that said something like "Uh.. I came across something here, mabye we should talk."

My two cents.