Slash, Duff Sue Axl Over Guns N' Roses Publishing Royalties

[DeN]

the lack of website is really a desapointement for me. plus the actual frontpage is really ugly. I hope it will change when the record is out.
They should hire a web-designer, or maybe robin can do it, his website is quite artistic and esthetic.

yeah, i suppose all the money was used in the brand new lambor...i mean in ChinDem 
i suppose the website will be out with the LP, yes...just a commercial thing.
i always though it's quite strange Axl never appeared online himself, in a way or another.
we all know he's online, a bit reclusive, and read some boards (this one at least h?h?).

but let's talk the *here today's lawyers*, we're a bit off topic. 

[dolphin]

This whole thing is one big cluster fuck. I'm going on vacation until we actually have music to talk about. Hold down the fort and see ya next year sometime (or maybe the next)!

Oh no.........if you leave I won't understand all this legal mumbo jumbo shit because you give a good intrepretation of it madagas.

Want to know what'll be a clusterfuck?

It won't matter WHO has WHAT proof nor does it matter WHAT the jury decides.............the JUDGE can overturn ANY decision.

How much do you want to bet the JUDGE will be a GUN's fan and drop this WHOLE ridiculous lawsuit and make them reunite as PUNISHMENT.....

HA HA....can you see it?  A FEDERAL JUDGE makes them reunite and CUT an album to please all of us who have waited

[dave-gnfnr2k]

Dave, I wouldn't be so sure about that first lawsuit. Axl clearly gave them a document saying he was leaving the partnership as of 12-31-1995. If he did, then he would be considered a terminated partner and banned from making decisions on the back catalog. The case could go either way depending on the wording of his notice. It certainly isn't a farce.

Letters of intent are not binding by law, and did you read Evas links? The fact is after 1995 Axl, slash and duff still were in the partnership since all three made decisions on gnr song uses.? Like I said they all sued Geffen for the GHs, if axl was not in the parntership then it would have been just slash and duff vs geffen, in 2003 all three of them renewed their copyright for the songs.? Its like you giving your two week notice at work then those two weeks passing and you keep working there then 10 years later your work claiming you really dont work there anymore.? It is a farce, since Axl with slash and duff have made partnerships decisions as late as 2003, so tell me how its not a farce?

Read Evas links, they clearly state that a letter like this cannot terminate a partnership unless they draw up another one with just slash and duff having the rights to the old songs. That NEVER happened thus Axl is still in the partnership.

[D]

Dave u arguing for Axl on the first lawsuit and are making great points on the FIRST lawsuit

but your argument contradicts the second lawsuit.

Axl,Duff,and Slash are still in a partnership therefore Axl cannot do any business regarding the back GNR catalog without OK from the other members

Just like Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic couldnt put out Nirvana material without Courtney Love signing off on it and Courtney couldnt put out any Nirvana material without Dave and Krist signing off on it.

Same thing here, Axl jumped the gun, did something he wasnt legally allowed to do cause he didnt consult the other members of the partnership.

We arent arguing the First Lawsuit here, we are arguing the most recent one.

[dave-gnfnr2k]

Dave u arguing for Axl on the first lawsuit and are making great points on the FIRST lawsuit

but your argument contradicts the second lawsuit.

Axl,Duff,and Slash are still in a partnership therefore Axl cannot do any business regarding the back GNR catalog without OK from the other members

Just like Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic couldnt put out Nirvana material without Courtney Love signing off on it and Courtney couldnt put out any Nirvana material without Dave and Krist signing off on it.

Same thing here, Axl jumped the gun, did something he wasnt legally allowed to do cause he didnt consult the other members of the partnership.

We arent arguing the First Lawsuit here, we are arguing the most recent one.

You are wrong. Axl can sell his shares of the partnership, but he cannot sell slash and duffs, that is where the 2nd lawsuit is coming from because Slash and duff did not get their checks in the mail.? Axl does not need permission to sell his shares, now if Axl sold duff and slashs then he is wrong, but we do not know that? yet. WE have to wait and see on his answer.
But if you look at that kobalt site, it says Axl Rose and not guns n roses or Axl, slash and duff. So that right there tells you it must some error as to why they didnt get their checks.

[D]

Ok, I see what u are saying, I thought u were still arguing the partnership

I think it will be some minor oversight, like they accidentally transferred all the publishing instead of just Axl's

but why didnt Axl just mail them their check or something?

I hope Axl isnt doing something dishonest

Ill givehim the benefit of the doubt but unless he has a great explanation it isnt lookin good.

[michaelvincent]

Like I said? before until this full story comes out about the checks, there is really no point it talking about it. Like I said it could have been a clarical error.? If Axl did try to pull a fast when then he deserves to be sued, but we have not heard his side yet, so lets wait for that before you guys try and tar and feather him.

Agreed. And I'm not tarring and feathering anyone, people just seem to have this insane notion that sometime last week they noticed that the check? never arrive and a couple days later a lawsuit was filed. On it's best day the American legal system doesn't move at twice that pace.

[dave-gnfnr2k]

Ok, I see what u are saying, I thought u were still arguing the partnership

I think it will be some minor oversight, like they accidentally transferred all the publishing instead of just Axl's

but why didnt Axl just mail them their check or something?

I hope Axl isnt doing something dishonest

Ill givehim the benefit of the doubt but unless he has a great explanation it isnt lookin good.

Well it looks like sact owes a lot of people their checks, this might be why slash and duff did not get theirs yet.
http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNewsArticle.jhtml?duid=mtfh48622_2005-08-23_08-53-11_l23596876_newsml

[killingvector]

Ok, I see what u are saying, I thought u were still arguing the partnership

I think it will be some minor oversight, like they accidentally transferred all the publishing instead of just Axl's

but why didnt Axl just mail them their check or something?

I hope Axl isnt doing something dishonest

Ill givehim the benefit of the doubt but unless he has a great explanation it isnt lookin good.

That's all we ask, D.

[michaelvincent]

but why didnt Axl just mail them their check or something?

Axl probably never sees the checks. It's a good bet that Slash or Duff physically see on either. The accountant probably processes them as they arrive and the money appears on their bank statements. Any smart person who regularly deals with that much money isn't doing it themselves, they have an accountant crunching  the numbers for them.

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

I been reading all the comments and opinions and questions in this thread and have been doing a little digging around on the net.

In that regard first off - the assertion that Axl transferred publishing from ASCAP is not correct.

Black Frog is a member of ASCAP.  BLACK FROG MUSIC    Society: ASCAP       CAE/IPI No. 345.59.70.38

Kobalt is a member of ASCAP  KOBALT SONGS MUSIC PUBLISHING    Society: ASCAP       CAE/IPI No. 402.82.67.78 

So ASCAP still tracks the use of GN'R music and collects royalties from those who use it. 

According to the article Axl had ASCAP chage the publisher/adminstrator - changing to whom ASCAP would send payment.

So who might have the payments been going to prior to the change the article spoke of?

Just about every GN'R song title lists "Black Frog.... o/o Kobalt" as the Publisher/ Adminstrator...
except for one that I found that lists:  BMG Songs Inc/Guns N' Roses Mu(sic)

Could it be that this is what they all said before it was switched to "Black Frog"?

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

This is the info in the ASCAP registry listed for publisher/adminstrator for "Anything Goes" (along with Black Frog):

BMG SONGS INC/GUNS N' ROSES MU
Society: ASCAP CAE/IPI No. 127.69.64.46
Contact:
BMG SONGS INC/GUNS N' ROSES MU
% GUNS N' ROSES MUSIC
% SUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
1222 16 AVE SOUTH
THIRD FLOOR
NASHVILLE , TN, 37212

Okay so who is this Sussman and Associates?

Charles Sussman was an agent for Guns N' Roses way back in  1988

GUNS N' ROSES, INC. Number: C1441630 Date Filed: 7/25/1988 Status: dissolved Jurisdiction: California Address 12424 WILSHIRE BLVD. #1000 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 Agent for Service of Process CHARLES SUSSMAN 12424 WILSHIRE BLVD. #1000 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025

And Charles Sussman at some point after 1988 became a partner in the bussiness management/accountant firm Gudvi, Sussman, & Oppenheim

on their website   http://www.gsogroup.com/Home.htm note, their nashville address is the same as the one listed on ASCAP for Sussman and Associates...

Gudvi, Sussman & Oppenheim, Inc.
NASHVILLE
1222 16th Avenue South
Third Floor
Nashville, TN 37212

and they also list a Sherman Oaks location:

Gudvi, Sussman & Oppenheim, Inc.
LOS ANGELES
15260 Ventura Boulevard
Suite 2100
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

This is a business managment and accountant firm.  You will see on their website that they provide 'royalty services'.

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

bear with me....

-- in California Bussiness Search you will find the following listing:

 "GUNS N' ROSES INTERNATIONAL FAN CLUB, INC". Number: C1881160 Date Filed: 2/4/1994 Status: suspended Jurisdiction: California Address 15250 VENTURA BLVD #900 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 Agent for Service of Process MICHAEL OPPENHEIM GUDVI, CHAPNICK & OPPENHEIM 15250 VENNTURA BLVD #900 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403

--- also if you look at all the 'dead' trademark registrations for "Guns N' Roses"  you'll see Gudvi Chapnick & Oppenheim noted in the applicant info.

REGISTRANT) GUNS N' ROSES composed of W. Axl Rose, Michael McKagan, and Saul Hudson, all U.S. citizens PARTNERSHIP CALIFORNIA Gudvi, Chapnick & Oppenheim 15250 Ventura Blvd., Suite 400 Sherman Oaks CALIFORNIA 91403

--- further Slash sued this firm in 1998

from:  http://heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=76 source MTVnews

"Slash is suing his former business manager over an accounting error that apparently led to over-payments to his ex-wife totaling over $200,000. Management for the former Guns guitarist confirmed the suit but declined to comment.
Sources report that payments were made to his former wife Renee over the course of their on-again, off-again relationship from 1992 to 1996 that doubled the $5000 per month amount that had been agreed to.
While some sources say Renee has refused to repay the money, others say that Slash has not asked her to do so. He instead intends to attempt recovery from the management company, Gudvi, Chapnick, Oppenheim and business manager Michael Oppenheim."

-- So "Gudvi, Chapnick, & Oppenheim" were agents/business managers for Guns N' Roses.... and at some point became "Gudvi, Sussman, and Oppenheim."

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

---Gudvi Sussman and Oppenheim partner Michael Oppenheim (the same Michael Oppenheim that Slash sued) was the Agent of Service listed in the corporate registration for Black Frog Enterprises in the state of California.? the registration was filed in 1998 and the current status is:? suspended

BLACK FROG ENTITIES Number: C2110022 Date Filed: 6/1/1998 Status: suspended Jurisdiction: California Address 15260 VENTURA BLVD NO 2100 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 Agent for Service of Process MICHAEL OPPENHEIM 15260 VENTURA BLVD NO 2100 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403

--- the same search for "black frog" resulted in the following listing for "Black Frog Music" registered on November 16, 1999, and that company is listed as active

BLACK FROG MUSIC Number: C2182491 Date Filed: 11/16/1999 Status: active Jurisdiction: California Address 450 NORTH ROXBURY DRIVE 8TH FLOOR BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 Agent for Service of Process JEREMY MOHR 450 NORTH ROXBURY DRIVE 8TH FLOOR BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210

---and a listing for Black Frog Touring registered on July 30, 2002

BLACK FROG TOURING, INC. Number: C2460956 Date Filed: 7/30/2002 Status: active Jurisdiction: California Address 450 N. ROXBURY DRIVE EIGHTH FLOOR BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 Agent for Service of Process JEREMY G. MOHR 450 N. ROXBURY DRIVE EIGHTH FLOOR BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210

----lets look at? some more info on "Black Frog".?
The Trademark Electronic Search System renders the following result for "Black Frog"

Owner (APPLICANT) BLACK FROG ENTITIES CORPORATION CALIFORNIA c/o Hansen, Jacobson, Teller, Hoberman,Newman & Warren/ Hertz & Goldring, LLP 450 N. Roxbury Drive, 8th Fl Beverly Hills CALIFORNIA 902104222 Attorney of Record HARVEY S. HERTZ Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator DEAD Abandonment Date February 23, 2001

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

---What has this to do with Guns N' Roses?

---Look at the 'live' search results for "Guns N' Roses" on the  Trademark Electronic Search System

(REGISTRANT) Guns N' Roses composed of W. Axl Rose, Michael McKagan and Saul Hudson, all U.S. citizens PARTNERSHIP CALIFORNIA  450 N. ROXBURY DRIVE, 8TH FLOOR BEVERLY HILLS CALIFORNIA 902104222 Attorney of Record HARVEY S. HERTZ

---Note the address for "Guns N' Roses"
---Note the address for "Black Frog Music" and "Black Frog Touring"
---It is the address of Hansen,Jacobson, Hoberman, Newman & Warren/ Hertz and Goldring which is listed for "Black Frog Entities" in care of address
---(The Agent for Service of Process listed for the active corporations "Black Frog Music" and "Black Frog Touring", Jeremy Mohr, is an attorney with Hertz & Goldring at the same address).

Harvey Hertz is listed as the attorney of record for both the "Black Frog Entities" trademark application and "Guns N' Roses" live trademark application.
(He is however, not the Hertz of Hertz & Goldring - the Hertz in Hertz & Goldring is senior partner Ken Hertz.)

What could this mean?

If the lawfirm  Hertz & Goldring represent both "Guns N' Roses" and "Black Frog" we can rule out that any change/switch made by them could be a case of one hand not knowing what the other was doing.  An attorney could not 'steal' from one of its clients for another.

And regarding "Gudvi, Sussman, Oppenheimer" - we don't know if they are the accountant firm or current business managers for Axl or Guns N' Roses, but we do know that in June of 1998 Axl apparently retained them in registering Black Frog Entities as a Corporation.  And we also know that in December 1998 the story came out about Slash's suing them in an article from MTV news that referenced them as Slash's "former business manager".

Yet, there is that listing on ASCAP that names Sussman as a "Publisher/Administrator"...
If ASCAP was sending Sussman the royalties, then Slash's royalties were being handled by an agent that he did not hire, but one nonetheless that was still handling/representing Guns N' Roses. 
This would be much like the situation we are assuming with Kobalt... that Slash (& Duff) would have to receive their portion of the Guns N' Roses Royalties from them.

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

And no, that isn't a lot that can be determined from all that 'info' I listed, but I found it interesting and thought some others might also.   

[Neemo]

And no, that isn't a lot that can be determined from all that 'info' I listed, but I found it interesting and thought some others might also.? ?

Well i found it interesting but for the most part i was like 

Does it mean that possibly Axl changed over the publishing company and now is trying to claim sole partnership of publishing rights, and therefore all the royalties that come along with that partnership? Isn't it just the same thing they are already suing Axl for? or was the previous publishing rights were owned by the three of them and now Axl has moved the rights from Axl, Duff, Slash to another company that Axl owns under Sanctuary? 

I'm not really good at legal speak, what are the 2 lawsuits all about.   

and shouldn't this be in the Axl's Legal Problems Thread? 

Anyway thats for digging for us Eva 

[dave-gnfnr2k]

For all that digging eva did, she proved one thing. That Axl is still in the partnership. Just look at all the times and the year dates Slash, Duff and Axl is listed as the partnership.

[Pandora]

Wow Eva, you're a bottomless well of information !  Thanks for taking the time to dig this all up 

[jarmo]

Legal Guns Blazing: 2 Former Bandmates Again Sue Axl Rose
By Charles Duhigg, Times Staff Writer


For the tattooed members of the band Guns N' Roses, paradise city has become an unwelcome legal jungle.

Former Guns N' Roses members Slash and Duff, otherwise known as Saul Hudson and Michael McKagan, are suing band leader Axl Rose for the second time in less than two years.

The latest complaint, filed Aug. 17 in federal court in Los Angeles, alleges that in May, Rose fraudulently named himself sole administrator of the band's copyrights, jilting his former partners out of their shares of revenue that Hudson and McKagan's lawyer said totals about $500,000 a year.

Guns N' Roses recorded such songs as "Welcome to the Jungle," "Paradise City" and "Sweet Child o' Mine."

This month's suit accuses Rose of "suffering an apparent attack of arrogance and ego" and says "he is no longer willing to acknowledge the contributions of his former partners and bandmates in having created some of rock's greatest hits."

The filing claims that Rose directed the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers to send all publishing royalties to Rose's publishing company, bypassing the band's other partners. The plaintiffs allege that so far, they have been excluded from their shares of at least $92,000 in royalties collected in one quarter of 2005.

But Howard Weitzman, Rose's lawyer, said the singer had asked to receive only his portion of royalties, and that the overpayment was due to a clerical error by the society. Weitzman said Rose had returned the extra funds to the organization. A representative from the society did not return phone calls.

Disputes among successful bands are not unusual, particularly as the passing of time sends royalties spiraling into the millions. Longtime Eagles guitarist Don Felder brought suit in 2001 against fellow band members Don Henley and Glenn Frey, claiming that they cheated him out of album and concert earnings totaling more than $50 million.

Last month the lead singer of Megadeth filed suit against the band's former bass player for allegedly using the group's name in an ad for musical equipment.

But Guns N' Roses, the Los Angeles band that formed in the mid-1980s and quickly became a worldwide sensation, has kept the courts especially busy.

Last year, Hudson and McKagan filed their first suit against Rose. This one alleged that the singer had wrongly claimed ownership of the group's assets after he quit Guns N' Roses in 1995. It also claimed that Rose had blocked Hudson and McKagan from licensing the band's recordings to movie producers, "costing the Guns N' Roses partnership millions of dollars to date." The case is pending.

Rose is the only member of the band who retains the right to perform under the Guns N' Roses name. Hudson and McKagan are now part of the bestselling band Velvet Revolver.

Also last year, Rose briefly joined forces with Hudson and McKagan to try to prevent Geffen Records from releasing a greatest-hits compilation of the band's tunes. They lost that suit, and the album went on to sell more than 1.8 million copies.

A similar reunion probably won't occur again soon, Weitzman said.

"When a band is very dependent on the personality of the group's leader, and that leader chooses to move on, it's not unusual for the members left behind to be hostile and mad," Rose's lawyer said. "If you mention the Eagles, people remember Henley, not Felder. When you mention Guns N' Roses, everyone knows the leader was Axl."


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-guns26aug26,1,1730355.story?coll=la-headlines-business



Here's the interesting part of the article:

But Howard Weitzman, Rose's lawyer, said the singer had asked to receive only his portion of royalties, and that the overpayment was due to a clerical error by the society. Weitzman said Rose had returned the extra funds to the organization. A representative from the society did not return phone calls.




/jarmo