Can we put the name issue to bed...the man's words

[damnthehaters]

Was the name well known when Tracii was in Guns N' Roses? Did they have any hit songs when he was in the band?

We're into popbands (and the rulesets therein) now?

Songs they wrote became classics on afd but thats a mute point to me. Respectively the name belongs to Axl and thats in imo justifiable in most aspects and the former line-ups are rightfully credited.

Gnr is not just the 'afd-band' just as nazareth is not just Love Hurts. You get my drift?

How am I applying my "self-constructed motivations"?

Looked as you indicated Axl mostly wanted the name for money and headlines, which was a motivation you yourself added.

You are missing the point. No one cared for GNR when Tracii was in the band. The band became a  huge hit when Slash and Adler came on board.  The band became a household name with AFD, Lies, and UYI. It's definitely NOT a moot point since this is one of the reasons why Axl  wanted the name.

Here's one way to look at it.....your right, nobody cared when Traci was in the band.  However, it was  Traci and Axl's band.  Traci quit.  It's now Axl's.  Axl CHOSE Duff, Steven, Slash (with help from Duff, still Axl's call), etc to be in HIS band.  So just because they made it big with certain people means Axl should give the name up? 

You ever think that the reason Axl wanted to keep the name was because it was HIS in the first place?  If I start a business, make it big with certain people, they quit.....I'm not changing the name.  And music is a business, plain and simple.  Just because some artist before GNR (under different circumstances) changes their name or goes solo, doesn't mean it's the right way to do it and certainly doesn't mean Axl needs to do it that way.   

[Sickthings3]

Random thought here.... I wish this site had a "like" button or an "upvote" button or something. Something to show support to post but if they don't really have anything else to add. I dunno.

As far as the name, I agree Axl was right in keeping it. It's his baby and whoever brought up the whole business thing was spot on! High Five!

Ok, I'm done.

[LongGoneDay]

The reality of the situation is that Axl was exactly 1/5 of Guns N? Roses when they made a name for themselves.
Nothing more, nothing less. He just happened to bring the name in. If Steven had brought the name in and the wherewithal to legally secure it, he could do exactly what Axl has done.
Then people could write their revisionist history about how Guns N? Roses was always Steven's vision, and he?d find success regardless of lineup and insert more fantasy bullshit here, and there.

The name alone was worthless until there was a band worth giving a damn about, which was the AFD lineup.
Geffen signed 5 people, not one. Geffen saw potential in a band. Not one member.

Of course Axl went on to secure the name, which was his right. I don?t see a lot of people disputing the legalities of the situation.

More so the moral, and artistic side of things.
From the outside looking in, it appeared Axl thought he alone was Guns N? Roses, and that came across as delusional and egotistical, and rubbed people the wrong way.
Guns N? Roses was bigger than any singular member.

They met their demise when they stopped functioning as a band of equals, and more like a business with a ?leader? and his employees.

[sky dog]

The reality of the situation is that they were NEVER equal by ANY stretch of the imagination...that is the definition of revisionist history. If you think Adler was as important musically and image wise to the public as Axl and Slash, you are out of your mind. If you really want to get down to nut cutting time, Izzy, Duff and Steven never really meant shit to the public. It was Axl and Slash. Period. To say Gnr would be the same today if Steven owned the name is absolutely insane...a very AVERAGE drummer who literally wrote nothing would be more important than one of the most iconic, charismatic lead singers of all time...wow....just floored. Gnr attained worldwide, international success purely because Axl and Slash, to an extent, had the drive to want to be the biggest band in the world. He wanted to be Queen, Zep, Aerosmith all rolled in to one. If it wasn't for his vision and willingness to change, they would have been one album wonders, broke up, and faded in to obscurity. He pushed them to record November Rain, Estranged...hell even SCOM. He pushed them to be more than the Sex Pistols meets the New York Dolls meets Aerosmith. Come on man.....it was never equal. 

[Ginger King]

The reality of the situation is that they were NEVER equal by ANY stretch of the imagination...that is the definition of revisionist history. If you think Adler was as important musically and image wise to the public as Axl and Slash, you are out of your mind. If you really want to get down to nut cutting time, Izzy, Duff and Steven never really meant shit to the public. It was Axl and Slash. Period. To say Gnr would be the same today if Steven owned the name is absolutely insane...a very AVERAGE drummer who literally wrote nothing would be more important than one of the most iconic, charismatic lead singers of all time...wow....just floored. Gnr attained worldwide, international success purely because Axl and Slash to an extent had the drive to want to be the biggest band in the world. He wanted to be Queen, Zep, Aerosmith all rolled in to one. If it wasn't for his vision and willingness to change, they would have been one album wonders, broke up, and faded in to obscurity. He pushed them to record November Rain, Estranged...hell even SCOM. He pushed them to be more than the Sex Pistols meets the New York Dolls and Aerosmith. Come on man.....it was never equal. 

The equality part of it comes from the partnership structure of the original lineup.  They were all equals, each getting a 20% cut.  That changed when Axl took over the name and the entity changed from a partnership to a corporation, with Axl employing other band members. 

It was equal, but equality breeds resentment?especially if some people feel they are doing more than others.  Also, I think you?re shortchanging the contributions of the original lineup, both musically and in the public, except for Axl of course.

[sky dog]

were you there? How old were you in 1987? Tell me, tell me what I saw and read in article after article after article.....what did you see then? For the record, the old bands material is run and controlled by Axl, Slash and Duff...1992 partnership has not changed in that regard.

[EmilyGNR]

I thought Adler mentioned that he got 15% and Axl got 25%.

Will look for that quote.

I'm with skydog on this non-issue by the way.

[EmilyGNR]

what the hell did Gilby do? Play on a bunch of cover songs....please. The very definition of hired hand. Zero songwriting credits as well.

And he has done nothing of any real note post- GNR.

[norway]

Could say Geffen made them big

How old were you in 1987?

Say 86. 

Thats when the 'afd-lineup' released 'Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide' ...which nobody cared about

[sky dog]

Emily, Axl was like 40% or something. It was laid out during the Adler trial so look there.

[Ginger King]

were you there? How old were you in 1987? Tell me, tell me what I saw and read in article after article after article.....what did you see then? For the record, the old bands material is run and controlled by Axl, Slash and Duff...1992 partnership has not changed in that regard.

Yes.  I was there.  I read every article you read and followed their every move.  It was the first band in a long time where almost everybody knew every band member's name.  That's why I say you're shortchanging the contributions of the other members.

Nobody (perhaps not even Axl) viewed GnR as Axl's creation back then.  To say so now is just revisionist history.  Go back and watch some of their early interviews and tell me what you see.  I see 5 guys working together from the ground up to create something awesome.  They each had nothing, and they turned that nothing into the best selling debut album of all-time in the US.

[Ginger King]

I thought Adler mentioned that he got 15% and Axl got 25%.

Will look for that quote.

I'm with skydog on this non-issue by the way.

Now that I read that, I think you might be right.  Did they ding Steven after they reinstated him (and Axl got his extra 5%)?  I don't recall.  Anyway, I agree it's really a non-issue.  My point was that there was much more collaboration and we're in this together type mentality with the original band (at least in the beginning).  Their lifestyle made it completely unsustainable, but it's way different than how it is today, where literally every band member except Axl has no clue what or when anything is happening.

[GNR2014]

what the hell did Gilby do? Play on a bunch of cover songs....please. The very definition of hired hand. Zero songwriting credits as well.

And he has done nothing of any real note post- GNR.

Agreed.
Gilby has released something like 4 solo albums.
Axl Rose, in comparison, has Chinese Democracy, the Remix album (TBA), Chinese Democracy 2 (Soon come), The Interview with the Vampire soundtrack, Appetite for Democracy, the End of Days Soundtrack, Big Daddy soundtrack and GN'R Greates Hits.
That's 8 to Gilby's 4.
Suck on that haters.

[damnthehaters]

The reality of the situation is that Axl was exactly 1/5 of Guns N? Roses when they made a name for themselves.
Nothing more, nothing less. He just happened to bring the name in. If Steven had brought the name in and the wherewithal to legally secure it, he could do exactly what Axl has done.
Then people could write their revisionist history about how Guns N? Roses was always Steven's vision, and he?d find success regardless of lineup and insert more fantasy bullshit here, and there.

The name alone was worthless until there was a band worth giving a damn about, which was the AFD lineup.
Geffen signed 5 people, not one. Geffen saw potential in a band. Not one member.

Of course Axl went on to secure the name, which was his right. I don?t see a lot of people disputing the legalities of the situation.

More so the moral, and artistic side of things.
From the outside looking in, it appeared Axl thought he alone was Guns N? Roses, and that came across as delusional and egotistical, and rubbed people the wrong way.
Guns N? Roses was bigger than any singular member.

They met their demise when they stopped functioning as a band of equals, and more like a business with a ?leader? and his employees.

Axl JUST brought the name in??  Lol. So when a general manager has a vision of the team he wants to put together and the guys he wants to win with, does he get any credit when that happens?  And let's say this GM also plays on the team and plays a big role.  Let's say he's the point guard.  Does he get any more credit?  Axl put GNR together plain and simple.  Maybe it was dead ass luck how the guys came together, but I don't believe that.  From my knowledge of GNR, Axl was a perfectionist from day 1 with GNR and made sure he was working with the right people.  And then once he had the guys, he played a big part in the music.  Even to this day, although not pumping out music, Axl still finds really talented musicians to join him.  You think that Axl should be seen in the same light as let's say Steven?  Or any other member for that matter?  No he shouldn't because he was and is the leader.  Axl has always been the one out front making the decisions.  And with that, he has always been the one who took the heat as well.  And that's how business works.  When teams win, the GM/coach is praised.  When they lose, they get shit on. Slash plays guitar and wrote a couple songs and riffs.  Axl put the band together, was the voice for the band, the lead singing, did a lot of the writing, and above all...was the one with the vision and made most decisions.  Axl was NOT 1/5 of the band...and that's reality!   Have you had the pleasure and stress of managing anything yourself?  By your comments, it doesn't seem that you have.  Or else you might understand the difference between Axl's role in GNR and let's say Stevens.  I'll tell you what, it's much more difficult to be the GM/coach than it is to be a player.

Geffen saw potential in a band that Axl put together!

Your right, I'm not disputing the legalities of keeping the name.  I'm giving another perspective on why he may have kept the name.  Because it's HIS band!  Your saying it's immoral to keep the name because the guys who were in the band when they had the most success are gone now?

How do you know gnr wasn't a business with a leader when it first started?  Because I think it was. 

[norway]

Nobody (perhaps not even Axl) viewed GnR as Axl's creation back then.

Yes, and?

Was the name Axl and Tracii's creation or not?

All 5 were important. Each contributed something to the band.

Not saying they werent (those five did indeed become a real good rockband consisting of hungry musicians), just saying why I think it's fair Axl owns the name. There is little doubt what album was/is the most popular and historicly relevant.

That's why they were successful.

Arguably. It's good to work together to acheive a common goal.

If don't see that as a valid argument against Axl being the legit user of the name tho.

[sky dog]

Ginger, when the band split up the overall songwriting credits contributions, they decided that Axl had 42% of the credits...Izzy had 2nd most, Slash, then Duff then Steven. Axl discusses it during his testimony in the Adler lawsuit. I believe Izzy had 25%.

I would get the exact figures but don't have time to listen.

[Ginger King]

Ginger, when the band split up the overall songwriting credits contributions, they decided that Axl had 42% of the credits...Izzy had 2nd most, Slash, then Duff then Steven. Axl discusses it during his testimony in the Adler lawsuit. I believe Izzy had 25%.

I would get the exact figures but don't have time to listen.

I'm not talking about when they split up...I'm talking about when they started. 

[Ginger King]

what the hell did Gilby do? Play on a bunch of cover songs....please. The very definition of hired hand. Zero songwriting credits as well.

And he has done nothing of any real note post- GNR.

Agreed.
Gilby has released something like 4 solo albums.
Axl Rose, in comparison, has Chinese Democracy, the Remix album (TBA), Chinese Democracy 2 (Soon come), The Interview with the Vampire soundtrack, Appetite for Democracy, the End of Days Soundtrack, Big Daddy soundtrack and GN'R Greates Hits.
That's 8 to Gilby's 4.
Suck on that haters.

So?in your 8 column for Axl, you?re including 2 albums that haven?t been released (one of which is a remix of songs already released), 3 movie soundtracks that each have one song from GnR, a concert DVD, and a greatest hits cd.  That.  Is.  Crazy. 

Axl is better than Slash, Gilby, Steven, etc. at many things...releasing music is not one of them.

[mortismurphy]

I see the original band as being a fairly equal relationship. Of course you would devalue Adler slightly on the simple premise that he was not a songwriter whereas the other four were, but Adler still contributed so much to the overall groove and sound of Appetite.

The reality of the situation is that Axl was exactly 1/5 of Guns N? Roses when they made a name for themselves.
Nothing more, nothing less. He just happened to bring the name in. If Steven had brought the name in and the wherewithal to legally secure it, he could do exactly what Axl has done.
Then people could write their revisionist history about how Guns N? Roses was always Steven's vision, and he?d find success regardless of lineup and insert more fantasy bullshit here, and there.

The name alone was worthless until there was a band worth giving a damn about, which was the AFD lineup.
Geffen signed 5 people, not one. Geffen saw potential in a band. Not one member.

Of course Axl went on to secure the name, which was his right. I don?t see a lot of people disputing the legalities of the situation.

More so the moral, and artistic side of things.
From the outside looking in, it appeared Axl thought he alone was Guns N? Roses, and that came across as delusional and egotistical, and rubbed people the wrong way.
Guns N? Roses was bigger than any singular member.

They met their demise when they stopped functioning as a band of equals, and more like a business with a ?leader? and his employees.

Axl JUST brought the name in??  Lol. So when a general manager has a vision of the team he wants to put together and the guys he wants to win with, does he get any credit when that happens?  And let's say this GM also plays on the team and plays a big role.  Let's say he's the point guard.  Does he get any more credit?  Axl put GNR together plain and simple.  Maybe it was dead ass luck how the guys came together, but I don't believe that.  From my knowledge of GNR, Axl was a perfectionist from day 1 with GNR and made sure he was working with the right people.  And then once he had the guys, he played a big part in the music.  Even to this day, although not pumping out music, Axl still finds really talented musicians to join him.  You think that Axl should be seen in the same light as let's say Steven?  Or any other member for that matter?  No he shouldn't because he was and is the leader.  Axl has always been the one out front making the decisions.  And with that, he has always been the one who took the heat as well.  And that's how business works.  When teams win, the GM/coach is praised.  When they lose, they get shit on. Slash plays guitar and wrote a couple songs and riffs.  Axl put the band together, was the voice for the band, the lead singing, did a lot of the writing, and above all...was the one with the vision and made most decisions.  Axl was NOT 1/5 of the band...and that's reality!   Have you had the pleasure and stress of managing anything yourself?  By your comments, it doesn't seem that you have.  Or else you might understand the difference between Axl's role in GNR and let's say Stevens.  I'll tell you what, it's much more difficult to be the GM/coach than it is to be a player.

Geffen saw potential in a band that Axl put together!

Your right, I'm not disputing the legalities of keeping the name.  I'm giving another perspective on why he may have kept the name.  Because it's HIS band!  Your saying it's immoral to keep the name because the guys who were in the band when they had the most success are gone now?

How do you know gnr wasn't a business with a leader when it first started?  Because I think it was. 

From my knowledge of that period, it was actually Duff's suggestion to bring in Slash and Adler. Rolling history further on, it was Slash who deliberately sought out and recruited Gilby and Matt as replacements. I think you are also underestimating the importance of Izzy Stradlin for that earlier club period.

[sky dog]

Ginger, after the lawsuit, Adler did retain 15% and Axl was 25%, Duff-Slash-Izzy 20%....however, during Axl's testimony in the lawsuit, he said the band had different %'s for each member. I have to listen to the testimony again....aye.