New song-writing rights

[jarmo]

I don't think it means song writing, as in who wrote what song, I suspect it might be more about who gets compensated (publishing).




/jarmo

[sky dog]

correct...ascap is legal compensation...booklets let you know who the artist thinks wrote the majority of the song. Booklets are meaningless "compensation" wise. Thanks Jarmo.....

[jarmo]

Compare Live Era to Appetite For Democracy. The song writing of the old songs didn't change. Just the fact that on Live Era it says "Guns N' Roses Music ASCAP", like the old albums.

Now it's split between Black Frog and GN'R music.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

I've always thought Slash deserved a credit for Estranged however.

Big time.

We've all heard that piano demo without the guitars.

[nick6sic6]

So that's the issue with every Guns release,so far at least.
Damn ,it's easier to get rights for cover versions,and by artists like Paul McCartney and Dylan,big names in the industry,than it is for GN'R to release anything 

[mortismurphy]

the fuckin booklets are meaningless....the Illusion booklets as well. For fuck's sake, the legal writing credits are with ASCAP and NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!!!!!!

read the thread at Gnrevo I linked to!!!!!!
We beat this issue to death....
http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?id=7377&p=1

You are really wanting an argument about something here!

[LIGuns]

ESTRANGED      (Title Code: 350180431) 
  Writers:
   HUDSON SAUL
   MC KAGAN DUFF ROSE
   ROSE W AXL
    Stradlin Izzy

Looks alphabetical..

[snead hearn]

Ah, the world of music rights. Feel free to jump in-there's no shallow end of the pool here, people.

There's the writers share of a composition. Then there's the publishing share of a composition. For example, you could have 4 writers on a song split evenly @ 25%. But if all 4 of those writers are signed to the same publisher, then that publisher has 100% share of the publishing. Then there's the question-does the publisher own or administrate for the writers? Or you can have various publishers for the song, adding up to 100%. There's an infinite way of splitting things up between writers share and publishing share.

As for registering the song with a Performing Rights Organization (such as ASCAP or BMI or SESAC here in the States), that can be the writer or if they are represented by a publisher, then the publisher can register the composition. So that anytime the song is, ahem, 'performed', then a compulsory royalty would be paid. There's a publishing royalty on the performance, and there's also a writer's royalty on the performance. 'Performed' can be, but not limited to: played on the radio, tv, jukebox, and so forth. The current rate is something like a fraction of a penny per 'performance'.

Don't get me started on streaming or digital or satellite radio rights breakdown. Or Mechanical Rights. And all of this info, short summary as it is, does not EVEN cover the master/record label side of things. At all.

Rights can be negotiated. It's all Intellectual PROPERTY. Point here: it's PROPERTY. It can be divided up, gained, subtracted, transferred, assigned, etc. As long as it's papered correctly.

What the record label prints in a booklet/liner note may or may not always be correct. Hell, that's the label, not the publisher. The label is just printing stuff and crediting, and let's hope all of that info is correct, at the time.

Yes, the PRO's list writers alphabetically. It's not in hierarchy of who has the more share on the song or not. And information can change at any time.

If your head is not exploding out through your nose yet, then consider going to law school or getting yourself committed.

Just curious: why did Axl name it Black Frog? Where did he get the name from?

[TheBaconman]

So if the uyi albums ever get re-released.  I wonder if they will have updated song credits?   Sorta like the blue ray that just came out

Also have the songs always been legaly registered this way?  Or was this a change that happend recently

If so that's huge change on some of the older songs and even on The CD album

[Spirit]

I've always thought Slash deserved a credit for Estranged however.

Big time.

We've all heard that piano demo without the guitars.

It all comes down to how GNR decided to credit writing for those albums: lyrics and melody (chord progression). It's entirely up to the artist how to give credit.

Just going by those criteria (lyrics and melody), can you recognize the piano demo as Estranged? If so, the guitars don't matter in that context.


I'm not saying that the guitars don't matter, they certainly makes the song better (epic even), full credit to Slash for doing that. I'm saying that the criteria laid down by the band don't qualify those guitar parts for writing credits. Slash created that on top of an existing melody, which is the core of the song.

[TheBaconman]

I've always thought Slash deserved a credit for Estranged however.

Big time.

We've all heard that piano demo without the guitars.

It all comes down to how GNR decided to credit writing for those albums: lyrics and melody (chord progression). It's entirely up to the artist how to give credit.

Just going by those criteria (lyrics and melody), can you recognize the piano demo as Estranged? If so, the guitars don't matter in that context.


I'm not saying that the guitars don't matter, they certainly makes the song better (epic even), full credit to Slash for doing that. I'm saying that the criteria laid down by the band don't qualify those guitar parts for writing credits. Slash created that on top of an existing melody, which is the core of the song.

So what I see is that when a song like Estranged first came out.   Only Axl got paid for it.   Now from looking at things Axl, slash, duff and izzy all get paid for it

Is this right? 

[Spirit]

I've always thought Slash deserved a credit for Estranged however.

Big time.

We've all heard that piano demo without the guitars.

It all comes down to how GNR decided to credit writing for those albums: lyrics and melody (chord progression). It's entirely up to the artist how to give credit.

Just going by those criteria (lyrics and melody), can you recognize the piano demo as Estranged? If so, the guitars don't matter in that context.


I'm not saying that the guitars don't matter, they certainly makes the song better (epic even), full credit to Slash for doing that. I'm saying that the criteria laid down by the band don't qualify those guitar parts for writing credits. Slash created that on top of an existing melody, which is the core of the song.

So what I see is that when a song like Estranged first came out.   Only Axl got paid for it.   Now from looking at things Axl, slash, duff and izzy all get paid for it

Is this right? 

Not sure if it was like this from the beginning. Could be that the credits in the liner notes of the album differed from the actual, legal royalty credits all along. If not, my guess is it was changed within the last 10 years. There were some legal action going on between Axl and Duff/Slash/Izzy regarding royalties around 2005 I believe. Could be mistaken though.

[mortismurphy]

Usually the chords, vocal melody and lyrics, and any main riff or significant intro riff (such as Sweet Child O' Mine) qualify a contribution as a songwriting credit. Things like guitar solos and fills, bass lines and drum tracks do not. The problem with Estranged is, those guitar lines by Slash are like 'riffs', in giving that song such a strong identity.

[TheBaconman]

I've always thought Slash deserved a credit for Estranged however.

Big time.

We've all heard that piano demo without the guitars.

It all comes down to how GNR decided to credit writing for those albums: lyrics and melody (chord progression). It's entirely up to the artist how to give credit.

Just going by those criteria (lyrics and melody), can you recognize the piano demo as Estranged? If so, the guitars don't matter in that context.


I'm not saying that the guitars don't matter, they certainly makes the song better (epic even), full credit to Slash for doing that. I'm saying that the criteria laid down by the band don't qualify those guitar parts for writing credits. Slash created that on top of an existing melody, which is the core of the song.

So what I see is that when a song like Estranged first came out.   Only Axl got paid for it.   Now from looking at things Axl, slash, duff and izzy all get paid for it

Is this right? 

Not sure if it was like this from the beginning. Could be that the credits in the liner notes of the album differed from the actual, legal royalty credits all along. If not, my guess is it was changed within the last 10 years. There were some legal action going on between Axl and Duff/Slash/Izzy regarding royalties around 2005 I believe. Could be mistaken though.

So I remember a interview with slash were he said he asked Axl to give him a writting credit on estranged because of the time effort etc.. And what ended out comming out he thought he deserved a credit.  What he got wasnt a writting credit but a nice thank you in the liner notes.  Slash also went on to say that was really nice of Axl and he was happy with that.   

So I really do doubt that slash or duff got paid for this song when released.   I am just guessing, but I would think royalties were orgininly split up via what was listed on the liner notes.   

So i am thinking this is a result of the lawsuit....    The change....    Never thought izzy was a part of the law suit.  Mb he wasn't and just benifited from it

Is it talked about in either duffs of slashes book?

[Spirit]

Usually the chords, vocal melody and lyrics, and any main riff or significant intro riff (such as Sweet Child O' Mine) qualify a contribution as a songwriting credit. Things like guitar solos and fills, bass lines and drum tracks do not. The problem with Estranged is, those guitar lines by Slash are like 'riffs', in giving that song such a strong identity.

I see Slash's guitar parts on Estranged as harmony that is part of the arrangement of the song. If Axl released the song with only him on the piano, and singing, you'll still recognize it as Estranged.


This has been discussed before, and there's always people with different views on this. I know you'll probably never agree, but that's how I view it. Once more, I'll just say that I think Slash's guitar playing raised the song to a new level, it's amazing.

[sky dog]

too funny...the lack of reading comprehension baffles me and scares me at the same time. I can't imagine being in Axl's shoes and having to be able to explain these things to a fan base as dense as Gnr's. And you wonder why he doesn't talk.....

[TheBaconman]

you beat me to it!  Since the Illusions, somehow the booklets only gave credit to the guys the band credits as the "majority" songwriter. ASCAP has the real legal writing credits....good thread on it here at Gnrevolution....

http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?id=7377&p=1

So I read a lot in the link your provided.  And yes, as it was a good read to start.   It trailed off very fast

So where is this lack of reading comprehension?   

is there something wrong with posting questions and having discussions on a guns n roses forum?   

[mortismurphy]

Usually the chords, vocal melody and lyrics, and any main riff or significant intro riff (such as Sweet Child O' Mine) qualify a contribution as a songwriting credit. Things like guitar solos and fills, bass lines and drum tracks do not. The problem with Estranged is, those guitar lines by Slash are like 'riffs', in giving that song such a strong identity.

I see Slash's guitar parts on Estranged as harmony that is part of the arrangement of the song. If Axl released the song with only him on the piano, and singing, you'll still recognize it as Estranged.


This has been discussed before, and there's always people with different views on this. I know you'll probably never agree, but that's how I view it. Once more, I'll just say that I think Slash's guitar playing raised the song to a new level, it's amazing.

You would recognize it but it would be a different animal. Slash's lines alter the song to such an extent that I feel they warranted a credit.

[EmilyGNR]

too funny...the lack of reading comprehension baffles me and scares me at the same time. I can't imagine being in Axl's shoes and having to be able to explain these things to a fan base as dense as Gnr's. And you wonder why he doesn't talk.....

what we got here is failure to communicate  

[mortismurphy]

Oh I know where he is coming from. It appears that he is alluding to the fact that there are two credits on the Illusions, a de jure ASCAP one and a de facto one created for the booklet simply to show 'who wrote what?'. The ASCAP credit reflects the business partnership as it then existed. Then it was @1991 Guns N' Roses ASCAP so obviously this entailed, Axl/Slash/Duff/Izzy (Matt and Dizzy were hired hands).

Before 1991 it included Adler. On the Appetite booklet they did not have demarcated credits so the booklet and ASCAP credit correspond making it something of a moot point.