Axl Rose signs Publishing Deal

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

I personally don?t hate hearing good songs on good TV commercials. Maybe US commercials are all craps, but I?ve seen really beautiful commercial films, even better than most of music video clips. When the commercial film is a cool one, it promotes the music efficiently far and wide.

sometimes music (and artists)  from generations past have been re/introduced to newer generations through movies and yes - tv and commercials

lol@ the tampon ad comments

um.. so yeah...  music can be used tastefully in commercials/advertising and if done for something 'cool' or innovative that 'fits' with the 'image' or 'tone' or 'mood'  of the artist &/or music.

[killingvector]

If slash and duff have as much credibility and respect for the old music as they say they do, we won't have to worry about tampon commericials or 80s Power Ballad Time Life Compilations.

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

I was thinking... this publishing deal does not preclude Axl from being involved in other business deals in the entertainment industry... whether it be with filmmaking, literary publsihing (biographical?), or as we see in the case of GTA, any other form of entertainment media by contributing his own talent to thier projects...

In GTA the A/S/D partnership obviously granted license for the inclusion of the music... as did the owner of the sound recordings (Geffen)...
but above and beyond and seperate from that Axl provided an entertaining performance.   Axl  is still a free agent who can pursue deals within the entertainment industry in projects such as these for his own personal satisfaction and enjoyment.   

[R. R. Dadfield]

and i wonder why izzy isn't considered part of the partnership??

Does anyone know?  Anyone?

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

from what i understand the partnership that has control rights of the material was formed in 1992 - and Izzy obviously was no longer involved at that time

don't get me wrong - the music industry and intellectual property rights and the entire copyright protection laws and all that is very complex and i don't understand completely what rights Izzy does or does not have or why in regards to music which he owns copyright to...

but as far as whatever rights the "GN'R partnership" excercise - it apparently goes beyond or at the least is seperate from, the rights Izzy holds of being a composer/writer and copyright holder (in part) of the music.

not that they ALL don't colelct royalties as is due them - but as far as having controlling interest or a controlling share -- it seems the "GN'R partnership" is the one that grants publishing rights and licensing (permission)....

and the partnership was formed after he quit the band

thats the best i can do to understand/explain

[ppbebe]

So, in short , the partners with the control rights can decide how to use the material and then the composers/ writers and other copyright holders of the music get fair(?) profits from that. Am I on the right track?

[jarmo]

Axl Rose Publishing Deal Fuels Feud

By JANET MORRISSEY, For The Associated Press

Rock recluse Axl Rose has signed a multimillion dollar publishing deal, and that isn't sitting well with his former Guns N' Roses bandmates.

The deal with music powerhouse Sanctuary Group covers both the back catalogue, which includes hits such as "Sweet Child of Mine," "Paradise City" and "November Rain," as well as Rose's future material, including dozens of new tracks he recently recorded for Universal Music.

After burning up charts and selling out stadiums around the world in the late '80s and early '90s, Guns N' Roses endured a bitter split, leaving only Rose and keyboard player Dizzy Reed to soldier on under the GNR banner. Former members Slash (Saul Hudson) and Duff (Michael) McKagan, now part of the band Velvet Revolver, filed a lawsuit against Rose last year over who controls the rights to the old GNR songs. The suit is still pending.

McKagan's lawyer, Glen Miskel, expressed surprise when told of the Sanctuary deal. He said Rose, Slash and Duff were part of a partnership and "neither Sanctuary nor Axl Rose have provided the remaining partners with a copy of that agreement." He added Rose is trying to transfer copyright interests in songs which "are not owned by Mr. Rose." Guns N' Roses' manager Merck Mercuriadis, who just so happens to be CEO of Sanctuary Group, said he didn't want to comment beyond the announcement of the deal.

Industry experts have valued the 20-year deal at about $19 million. Guess a Guns N' Roses reunion won't be happening anytime soon.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050201/ap_en_ce/music_minute_axl_rose


Thanks to Anthony



/jarmo

[christina_rose]

including dozens of new tracks he recently recorded for Universal Music.

I know the majority of it doesn't sound promising, but that does.

[tHeElEcTrIcSiNtAr]

Looks like Slash and Duff want to be assholes and take this thing even farther cause of Axl's deal.  If this happens, we probably wont see Chinese Democracy for a long time.

[Eazy E]

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd we're back at square one.

[madagas]

This is going to be quite a scuffle!

[Mateoson]

Well it's no surprise they are giving this deal grief. Obviously there are a lot of feelings between the three. Axl probably doesn't want to deal with slash/duff directly. So the obvious solution was to give Sanctuary the authority to deal with those fucks. This way Axl cuts unwanted stress out of his life and can move on with his new band and he trusts Sanctuary to make the right choices with the music.

At some point, you just have to move on. These guys should just be happy for Axl and the fact that they don't have to wait on a "reclusive hermit", who they hate, to finalize deals with the old music. I can't understand why they aren't happy about this. Enough of the fucking lawsuits and bickering already. Leave Axl be.

[Mikkamakka]

Looks like Slash and Duff want to be assholes and take this thing even farther cause of Axl's deal.? If this happens, we probably wont see Chinese Democracy for a long time.

Yes, you surely know what's the case with their lawsuit. If your ex-girlfriend sells your house just because you bought it together and she gave spent money for it, then you'll be pissed off for sure. That is Duff's point of view. If Axl sold the rights which were only belong to him, then it's alright. The court will decide who is right, so you don't have to call Slash, Duff or Axl an asshole, because some would think you are the asshole.

[gabble]

from what i understand the partnership that has control rights of the material was formed in 1992 - and Izzy obviously was no longer involved at that time

Sidenote: If I remember correctly, Izzy ceased to receive/earn royalties on GN'R's music circa 1997/1998.? Not really a part of this particular partnership question, but kinda sorta related.

[norway]

If this happens, we probably wont see Chinese Democracy for a long time.

chinese democracy is future material? and possible new lawsuits regardin old catalogue rights-
- will most likely not prevent sanctuary 2 release chinese democracy

if not axl wan't "all cookies cleared" b4 bein publicly active again, which i doubt

This way Axl cuts unwanted stress out of his life and can move on with his new band

wisest post so far, i think 2? + other beneficial reasons...

[Pingouirose]

Yeah I think that Slash & Duff are not assholes and are in their rights: who would like to lose millions of dollars ? 

[younggunner]

If Axl sold the rights which were only belong to him, then it's alright.

Do you really think Sanctuary woul dhave done this deal if it had the chance of being blocked in court? Its pretty safe to say Axl sold his rights and his entitlements to the company. Otherwise I doubt the company would have take part in this investment.

I wonder how much of the Axl getting 13 mil upfront has to do with Slash and Duffs wanting to challenge this move. My guess it has a big effect....

I just dont get why though. They finally have Axl out of the picture in terms of dealing witht he old stuff. Isnt that what they always talked about in the press. How they dont want to have anything to do with him? Plus they still have thier own personal vote on what goes and doesnt go in movies. And they also have the potential to make more than Axl on this deal. So whats the problemo? Just because Axl pulls a fast one doesnt mean you have to stop it. Or is that part of the whole "im in a dangerous band thing"?....

who would like to lose millions of dollars

how are they losing millions of dollars? They have the chance to make more than Axl on this deal...

btw arent slash and duff the same people who have claimed/sued/challenged Axl that he doesnt have any old gnr rights in the 1st place?

[Jonx]

Shit!

Yet more "legalities"

Jonx

[GNROSAS]

Axl/Sanctuary must be really confident that Axl Owns his publicity Rights and he will win the Case Of Slash & Duff. Duff & Slash claim Axl Has no publicity rights as he left the partership. I find it impossible for Sanctuary to sign the deal if they weren't 100% confident that Axl actually Owns his publicity rights.
Very strange that this deal was done at the same time a lawshit is pending for exactly the publishing rights of Axl Rose.

 ?

[February]

Does anyone know the concrete terms of the lawsuit Slash/Duff have on Axl? Do they argue the publishing rights on the songs sold under the name Guns N roses? Because that's what Sanctuary bought.
If that's the case, and i'm sure that sanctuary have plenty of lawyers and i don't know american laws, but in my country you can't make deals over interests that are to be decided by a court, the deal would be considered nule as soon as interested parties would complain. Unless if for instance Sanctuary takes Axl interests as their own and then Slash/Duff would be in a lawsuit with Sanctuary for the rights to the material and no longer with Axl. If this is the case and considering the costs of this sort of lawsuits Axl made a reallllllly great deal, generally companies don't buy "things" if they don't know if a court is gone come and say "sorry it's not yours, you couldn't made agrements befor court decision so if you invested money it's your one problem". ?
Anyone knows how is it in America?, By the way what are considered publicity rights? because that could only mean profits from direct publicity, like shirts or it could even consider profits from tours for instance.
Fev