New song-writing rights

[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.

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.

It's still harmony, extremely good harmony. The guitar parts are following the chord progression of the piano. It makes the song sound different yes, but you could say the same thing about Guns' version of KOHD. The sound is different from Dylan's original, but it's the same song.


I'll add this: the band could have said that "significant harmony parts should be credited for this album", but they didn't. That was totally up to themselves. When laying their own criteria on the line, Slash's parts in Estranged don't warrant credit. That's how they chose to do it.

[mortismurphy]

I do not agree. I think it is a riff. Harmony implies something in the background, something subtle.

[TheBaconman]

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.

It's still harmony, extremely good harmony. The guitar parts are following the chord progression of the piano. It makes the song sound different yes, but you could say the same thing about Guns' version of KOHD. The sound is different from Dylan's original, but it's the same song.


I'll add this: the band could have said that "significant harmony parts should be credited for this album", but they didn't. That was totally up to themselves. When laying their own criteria on the line, Slash's parts in Estranged don't warrant credit. That's how they chose to do it.

Well that's not how they choose to do it though

Slash asked for a writting credit for Estranged, asked Axl.  Axl responded by giving Slash a written thank you.   Which slash appreciated.    

If it was democrated the 4 guys would like of voted for it.   Seems like when it was a specific guys song, he was given say as to who or what got credited

[TheBaconman]

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.

It's still harmony, extremely good harmony. The guitar parts are following the chord progression of the piano. It makes the song sound different yes, but you could say the same thing about Guns' version of KOHD. The sound is different from Dylan's original, but it's the same song.


I'll add this: the band could have said that "significant harmony parts should be credited for this album", but they didn't. That was totally up to themselves. When laying their own criteria on the line, Slash's parts in Estranged don't warrant credit. That's how they chose to do it.

And we can't compair Estranged in the pre recoreed writting stage.   To guns use of kohd.    One is being written by a band.  The other song already has a copywriter on it. For not just lyrics but for the melody and music.   Soon and copywrite gets involved u are screwed when it comes to covering it.   
If Axl already had a cooywrite on estranged it would be a different story

[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.

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.

It's still harmony, extremely good harmony. The guitar parts are following the chord progression of the piano. It makes the song sound different yes, but you could say the same thing about Guns' version of KOHD. The sound is different from Dylan's original, but it's the same song.


I'll add this: the band could have said that "significant harmony parts should be credited for this album", but they didn't. That was totally up to themselves. When laying their own criteria on the line, Slash's parts in Estranged don't warrant credit. That's how they chose to do it.

And we can't compair Estranged in the pre recoreed writting stage.   To guns use of kohd.    One is being written by a band.  The other song already has a copywriter on it. For not just lyrics but for the melody and music.   Soon and copywrite gets involved u are screwed when it comes to covering it.   
If Axl already had a cooywrite on estranged it would be a different story

Look, I'm not saying it's possible to get a credit on a song you cover. I was just comparing to show that two different versions of the same song is still the same song. It's just different arrangements. Estranged had lyrics and melody when Slash started to work on it. He then improved it, without altering the main melody.

[mortismurphy]

He added a riff though. Colloquial term for 'melody' = 'riff'.

[jarmo]

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.

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.

Who gets compensated for publishing versus who wrote what.




/jarmo

[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.

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.

Who gets compensated for publishing versus who wrote what.




/jarmo

Come again?

Sky dog seems to be more well versed on it than me. You are better off talking to him.

[sky dog]

I only know the basics....read Snead Hearns post again. He knows what he is talking about. I think Pilferk may know a thing or two as well.

[D-GenerationX]

I only know the basics....read Snead Hearns post again. He knows what he is talking about. I think Pilferk may know a thing or two as well.

Sure, just ask him.

[TheBaconman]

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.

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.

Who gets compensated for publishing versus who wrote what.




/jarmo

It's more of me being courious

I actually think the liner notes did a great job representing who wrote what.   And we can discuss who should of been credited more on the liner notes all day

Regardless.

I am pretty sure that's how the royalties were split up.     So I am now just wondering if the boys are getting a bigger cut for something they never used to....

[jarmo]

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.

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.

Who gets compensated for publishing versus who wrote what.




/jarmo

Come again?

Sky dog seems to be more well versed on it than me. You are better off talking to him.

I posted the same thing you said later. Using different words.

Actual songwriting credits versus publishing credits (who gets compensated).



/jarmo

[ckgent]

There are various ways the artists get paid for the songs, publishing is a big deal, however with the likes of PRS, all performers involved in the creation or crediting of a song get paid. This applies to album sales, radio/tv play etc. Even when guns gig these days, there is a % from that which goes to duff, slash etc due to the songs still being played

[Limulus]

remember when old Geffen stopped paying for CD album, around that time Axl sold his publishing rights for an amount near 20 mio $$.

can someone clear up please how this might also have had an effect of the already complicated splitting costs and stuff?
publishing money does not get to Axl anymore, but partly still to Slash and Duff? or is this another animal?

[sky dog]

not to fan the flames, but what the hell, it's Friday! 

http://www.mtv.com/news/1508091/slash-duff-sue-axl-over-guns-n-roses-publishing-royalties/


before you get all hot and bothered, all lawsuits filed by Slash/Duff against Axl were dropped. Long story short....the partnership between Slash/Duff/Axl created in 1992 still stands today. When that partnership was created is when Axl got the rights to the name. However, any use of the original bands material has to be authorized by all three of them.

[Spirit]

not to fan the flames, but what the hell, it's Friday! 

http://www.mtv.com/news/1508091/slash-duff-sue-axl-over-guns-n-roses-publishing-royalties/


before you get all hot and bothered, all lawsuits filed by Slash/Duff against Axl were dropped. Long story short....the partnership between Slash/Duff/Axl created in 1992 still stands today. When that partnership was created is when Axl got the rights to the name. However, any use of the original bands material has to be authorized by all three of them.

Not 100% sure on this, but wasn't the original publishing partnership Axl/Slash/Duff/Izzy? Then, in the late '90s it got divided into Black Frog Music (Axl) and the other three (Slash/Duff/Izzy) remained in Guns N' Roses Music.

Again, I'm just going by a vague memory on this, no sure at all..

[Spirit]

He added a riff though. Colloquial term for 'melody' = 'riff'.

But the guitar part doesn't hold the structural framework of the song. It is built upon the piano. Slash wrote those part as a compliment to the already existing melody. I'm just arguing for why it didn't get a credit at the time, it's technicalities.

It would be something else if Slash came up with the chord progression, and made the guitar parts from the ground up. He made them with basis in the piano.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, it is a significant piece of the song. Especially since Slash put so much work into those parts.

Let's just agree to disagree on this one. I know we have different views on this.

[JAEBALL]

To me the songs are sum of all their parts... I love the song Estranged... it might be Axl's baby... but they all added to it.

I really could care less who gets the writing credit for it.

It's like people care so they can say see well that guys contributions don't mean much...

[Spirit]

To me the songs are sum of all their parts... I love the song Estranged... it might be Axl's baby... but they all added to it.

I really could care less who gets the writing credit for it.

It's like people care so they can say see well that guys contributions don't mean much...

Of course it is. I'm not saying that Estranged (or any song for that matter) would have been equally good without everyone's contributions. I think I've said that in every post as well. Like I said, this is basically about technicalities. It doesn't matter much to us really.

As we've seen they all get paid for this anyways... 

[jarmo]

not to fan the flames, but what the hell, it's Friday! 

http://www.mtv.com/news/1508091/slash-duff-sue-axl-over-guns-n-roses-publishing-royalties/


before you get all hot and bothered, all lawsuits filed by Slash/Duff against Axl were dropped. Long story short....the partnership between Slash/Duff/Axl created in 1992 still stands today. When that partnership was created is when Axl got the rights to the name. However, any use of the original bands material has to be authorized by all three of them.

Not 100% sure on this, but wasn't the original publishing partnership Axl/Slash/Duff/Izzy? Then, in the late '90s it got divided into Black Frog Music (Axl) and the other three (Slash/Duff/Izzy) remained in Guns N' Roses Music.

Again, I'm just going by a vague memory on this, no sure at all..

Like I said, Live Era lists Guns N' Roses Music ASCAP, and Appetite For Democracy lists both (GN'R Music & Black Frog).




/jarmo