Guns N' Roses' current record company

[Spirit]

And pretty much what Bridges said, except that the re-recording of Sweet Child could solely be not having to pay Slash and Duff royalties over the recording. Which is pretty spiteful, but I don't even know if that's the reason. Because they will always have a say in what happens with the music itself.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Slash and Duff will always receive royalties for the song ? even if it's a re-recording, as they are listed as writers of the song.

[Spirit]

In they don't all sign off, there can be legal trouble -- remember when "Welcome to the Jungle" was used for a "Guitar Hero" game (the one that featured Slash), and Axl sued, publicly stating that they weren't granted the license, which means Axl obviously didn't sign off -- at least not with the awareness that Slash was going to be associated so heavily with the game.  I am guessing Axl had a pre-ordained provision for any deal that whenever he said "yes", former members weren't permitted to be used in context with GNR songs.

I believe the case was that Axl did sign off on the song, but wasn't informed about the context it was being used in (Slash as a character playing it).

[Bridge]

I believe the case was that Axl did sign off on the song, but wasn't informed about the context it was being used in (Slash as a character playing it).

Yeah, I always figured that Axl either signed off without knowledge of Slash's involvement, or didn't sign off at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Slash and Duff will always receive royalties for the song ? even if it's a re-recording, as they are listed as writers of the song.

Correct.  Anytime any GNR song is re-recorded or covered by someone else, all credited writers will receive royalties.  Take Sheryl Crow's version of "Sweet Child o Mine", which was also featured in "Big Daddy" as well as one of her albums.  Axl, Slash, Duff, Steven, and Izzy will always receive royalties on every copy sold, despite the fact that it's a cover song that none of them played on.

My next question would be about songs re-done in whole or part by another artist and used commercially...

... specifically, does Axl/Slash/AFD5 have any say in SCOM being used this way in this commercial?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxL7BT7UDrY

I doubt they gave permission for that, because it's a cover version.  That piano version in that commercial is by the band Taken By Trees, an entirely separate entity from Guns N Roses.  In many cases for commercials and such, companies hire other bands to record cover versions to avoid having to license the original song, which saves them money, time, and having to receive permission.

Cover acts generally don't have to clear anything with the original band as long as they pay royalties.  This is protected by the Compulsory License law.  The only exceptions are when bands own their own publishing (as opposed to the record label owning it) therefore giving them control to approve or deny permission.  But when the record labels own it, artists often don't find out that their song has been covered until they begin seeing it on their royalty statements, or they hear the cover version on the radio.

https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-a-compulsory-license-in-music-2460357

A Compulsory license lets a musician record and sell their rendition of any previously recorded song by paying royalties to the copyright holder of the original composition.  These laws let you legally release your new recording of any existing song, and under certain conditions, even without the copyright holder's permission.

[allwaystired]

Bearing in mind all of the above- where does that leave the issue of deluxe remasters/reissues?

I still can't figure out why this has never happened, as it's so commonplace across the industry now. Would it have something to do with the fact that any 'new' material included (i.e. demos, live tracks, outtakes etc) would not be covered by the original contract, so hence not Geffen's property, and therefore need to be subject to an entirely new deal being agreed?

If that's the case, it would seem to indicate that GNR are indeed without a deal. I can't see it not happening if Geffen had any way to make it happen. If they could do it, they would have done I'm sure.

[Mysteron]

It's been uncertain in the past years if GN'R is still with a record company, at least to me.

Interscope have no mention of the band on their website. Universal Music (at least in the US), currently have no mention either.

I think I've found evidence that they're indeed with Interscope still, when I came across a press release from late last year announcing a pop-up store called "Wear. Music.".



Here's a quote from the release:

"The pop-up features unique stores from Interscope artists including The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Guns N? Roses, Lady Gaga, Marilyn Manson, and The Rolling Stones ..."

https://www.interscope.com/wearmusic




So, not independent yet...

I would guess Universal/Geffen

The last (re)release was an audio eAlbum of Use Your Illusion II on 11th December 2015, UPC code was 00602547707925. It was released on the Geffen label.

The last Interscope release(s) were some ringtones on 24th October 2008, it has been Geffen all the way since then. Obviously Bravado do the merchandise, and there has been a couple of releases under the Universal Special Products umbrella.

[Spirit]

It's been uncertain in the past years if GN'R is still with a record company, at least to me.

Interscope have no mention of the band on their website. Universal Music (at least in the US), currently have no mention either.

I think I've found evidence that they're indeed with Interscope still, when I came across a press release from late last year announcing a pop-up store called "Wear. Music.".



Here's a quote from the release:

"The pop-up features unique stores from Interscope artists including The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Guns N? Roses, Lady Gaga, Marilyn Manson, and The Rolling Stones ..."

https://www.interscope.com/wearmusic




So, not independent yet...

I would guess Universal/Geffen

The last (re)release was an audio eAlbum of Use Your Illusion II on 11th December 2015, UPC code was 00602547707925. It was released on the Geffen label.

The last Interscope release(s) were some ringtones on 24th October 2008, it has been Geffen all the way since then. Obviously Bravado do the merchandise, and there has been a couple of releases under the Universal Special Products umbrella.

They're part of the same company though? "Interscope - Geffen - A&M"

http://www.universalmusic.com/label/interscope-geffen-am/.

[Mysteron]

It's been uncertain in the past years if GN'R is still with a record company, at least to me.

Interscope have no mention of the band on their website. Universal Music (at least in the US), currently have no mention either.

I think I've found evidence that they're indeed with Interscope still, when I came across a press release from late last year announcing a pop-up store called "Wear. Music.".



Here's a quote from the release:

"The pop-up features unique stores from Interscope artists including The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Guns N? Roses, Lady Gaga, Marilyn Manson, and The Rolling Stones ..."

https://www.interscope.com/wearmusic




So, not independent yet...

I would guess Universal/Geffen

The last (re)release was an audio eAlbum of Use Your Illusion II on 11th December 2015, UPC code was 00602547707925. It was released on the Geffen label.

The last Interscope release(s) were some ringtones on 24th October 2008, it has been Geffen all the way since then. Obviously Bravado do the merchandise, and there has been a couple of releases under the Universal Special Products umbrella.

They're part of the same company though? "Interscope - Geffen - A&M"

http://www.universalmusic.com/label/interscope-geffen-am/.

That's right. Universal are the umbrella company, and Interscope, Geffen and A&M are labels within that umbrella.

As it stands, GN'R are an active band in Unversal's database, and their music releases/rereleases have been released under Geffen since October 2008 according to that database.

[Spirit]

It's been uncertain in the past years if GN'R is still with a record company, at least to me.

Interscope have no mention of the band on their website. Universal Music (at least in the US), currently have no mention either.

I think I've found evidence that they're indeed with Interscope still, when I came across a press release from late last year announcing a pop-up store called "Wear. Music.".



Here's a quote from the release:

"The pop-up features unique stores from Interscope artists including The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Guns N? Roses, Lady Gaga, Marilyn Manson, and The Rolling Stones ..."

https://www.interscope.com/wearmusic




So, not independent yet...

I would guess Universal/Geffen

The last (re)release was an audio eAlbum of Use Your Illusion II on 11th December 2015, UPC code was 00602547707925. It was released on the Geffen label.

The last Interscope release(s) were some ringtones on 24th October 2008, it has been Geffen all the way since then. Obviously Bravado do the merchandise, and there has been a couple of releases under the Universal Special Products umbrella.

They're part of the same company though? "Interscope - Geffen - A&M"

http://www.universalmusic.com/label/interscope-geffen-am/.

That's right. Universal are the umbrella company, and Interscope, Geffen and A&M are labels within that umbrella.

As it stands, GN'R are an active band in Unversal's database, and their music releases/rereleases have been released under Geffen since October 2008 according to that database.

It's fair to say they're still with Universal/Interscope Geffen A&M then.

I find it a bit odd that neither Universal or Geffen (interscope.com) have a mention of GN'R on their respective websites. Especially now, with the band doing great success live, wouldn't they want to push their catalogue during this time?

Or, has record sales actually come to a point where the labels don't even bother anymore...

[Spirit]

The only attempt I've seen is Universal Music Ireland actually promoted GH ahead of the concert with a TV ad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFR6ZFpV_eM

[Mysteron]

It's been uncertain in the past years if GN'R is still with a record company, at least to me.

Interscope have no mention of the band on their website. Universal Music (at least in the US), currently have no mention either.

I think I've found evidence that they're indeed with Interscope still, when I came across a press release from late last year announcing a pop-up store called "Wear. Music.".



Here's a quote from the release:

"The pop-up features unique stores from Interscope artists including The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Guns N? Roses, Lady Gaga, Marilyn Manson, and The Rolling Stones ..."

https://www.interscope.com/wearmusic




So, not independent yet...

I would guess Universal/Geffen

The last (re)release was an audio eAlbum of Use Your Illusion II on 11th December 2015, UPC code was 00602547707925. It was released on the Geffen label.

The last Interscope release(s) were some ringtones on 24th October 2008, it has been Geffen all the way since then. Obviously Bravado do the merchandise, and there has been a couple of releases under the Universal Special Products umbrella.

They're part of the same company though? "Interscope - Geffen - A&M"

http://www.universalmusic.com/label/interscope-geffen-am/.

That's right. Universal are the umbrella company, and Interscope, Geffen and A&M are labels within that umbrella.

As it stands, GN'R are an active band in Unversal's database, and their music releases/rereleases have been released under Geffen since October 2008 according to that database.

It's fair to say they're still with Universal/Interscope Geffen A&M then.

I find it a bit odd that neither Universal or Geffen (interscope.com) have a mention of GN'R on their respective websites. Especially now, with the band doing great success live, wouldn't they want to push their catalogue during this time?

Or, has record sales actually come to a point where the labels don't even bother anymore...

Yeah, it is all theoretically interchangeable I guess. I don't know. Just reporting what is on the database.

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

[Spirit]

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

That's the reason I was uncertain about them still being with a label to begin with.

But it all seems cleared up now, although a bit elusive behavior by the label these days.

[Mysteron]

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

That's the reason I was uncertain about them still being with a label to begin with.

But it all seems cleared up now, although a bit elusive behavior by the label these days.

Here are some pages out there;

This page still exists, which is quite old though

http://www.universalmusicenterprises.com/gunsnroses

An old Chinese Democracy news article. Lists Black Frog/Geffen Records as label

http://www.universalmusic.com/guns-n-roses-chinese-democracy-november-23/

Universal Music Publishing UK

http://www.umusicpub.co.uk/en-GB/Artists/G/Guns-N-Roses.aspx

Universal Japan

www.universal-music.co.jp/guns-n-roses/

[Mysteron]

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

That's the reason I was uncertain about them still being with a label to begin with.

But it all seems cleared up now, although a bit elusive behavior by the label these days.

It looks as though Geffen Interscope A&M is a combined thing, which is what you were saying. This article;

http://www.universalmusic.com/nterscope-records-teams-up-with-bravado-to-create-wear-music-pop-up-experience-at-hollywood-highland-december-2nd-through-january-2nd/

says "Interscope Geffen A&M is a major force in global music, developing chart-topping artists across a wide range of musical genres including rock, rap, pop and alternative. Interscope Geffen A&M is part of Universal Music Group, the world?s largest music company."

[AxlsMainMan]

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

That's the reason I was uncertain about them still being with a label to begin with.

But it all seems cleared up now, although a bit elusive behavior by the label these days.

Here are some pages out there;

This page still exists, which is quite old though

http://www.universalmusicenterprises.com/gunsnroses

Odd that Appetite for Democracy is listed but not Chinese Democracy.

[raindog]

As for the marketing, again, I do not know. The old Interscope GN'R website was never very exciting, and the bio on the database is an old one written by Lori Earl in 2000. It doesn't look as though the record label has put a lot of effort into anything apart from pushing out merchandise.

That's the reason I was uncertain about them still being with a label to begin with.

But it all seems cleared up now, although a bit elusive behavior by the label these days.

Here are some pages out there;

This page still exists, which is quite old though

http://www.universalmusicenterprises.com/gunsnroses

Odd that Appetite for Democracy is listed but not Chinese Democracy.

Not as odd as the fact that the bio page ends at 1988! Heh.

[Executioner]

The Vegas DVD "Appetite for Democracy" was released through Universal /Interscope which was only 2014 however they must be the most frustrating artists in history for a record companies to work with as they haven't exactly being consistent in delivering on a consistent basis since UYIs in 1991.

[Irish gunner II]

Geffen was the record company that signed GnR 30 years ago, and paid for the recording of Appetite, Lies, Illusions etc. They OWN the copyright to the recordings and can do WHATEVER they want with it. Since Interscope bought up Geffen, they now own those rights. Depending on the kind of contract GnR has, they could still be signed to Interscope. Usually artists sign for a certain amount of albums, that was pretty much the rule in the 80's. It took Madonna 25 years to be done with the deal she signed in 1983: she had to release 10 albums before the deal ended. I can imagine GnR having something similar. So my bet is that they're still with Interscope b/c they still owe them one, two or maybe more albums.

Regarding their music being used for a game, commercial or whatever:

There are TWO main parties involved in that: the one that OWNS the copyright to the RECORDINGS (usually record company) and the person(s) owning the copyright to the MUSIC. In this case that's Geffen for the recordings and Axl, Slash and Duff for most of the music GnR wrote. If one of those parties decides not to sign off, no one can use the recording or the song.

I hope this might give some of you some insight how the music business works regarding records and music (publishing) 

First off, thanks for your insight. Very educational. 

I quoted the last part because I have 2 questions as it would relate to GH. 
Would the release of GH count towards the number of albums possibly stilled owed the "paying owner"? 
And, if as you say "If one of those parties decides not to sign off...", how was GH able to be released against the wishes of both Axl and Slash?

My recollection is that GH was released to fill a gap and Chinese democracy was the last album to satisfy The contract GNR had with geffen. I'm very much open to correction of my recollections though.

[Just_Me]

I've heard two versions - one that Greatest Hits + Chinese Democracy completed their contract with Geffen (or Interscope/Universal/whatever) and one that Greatest Hits completed the original contract and a new one was negotiated specifically for Chinese Democracy, which is one of the things that delayed the album.

I'm often sceptical of that second one because I can't imagine anyone involved would be keen to renegotiate the contract at that point, but then maybe that put them on a sort-of even footing - both sides would be willing to concede some things in order to get what they wanted and simply to get the business complications out the way and get the damn thing done. Someone did tell me that the new contract basically said the band were under no obligation to do anything except release an album of some description at some point in time, but in return there was a cap on how much Geffen would pay for it (whilst retaining their stake in the profits), but they didn't know where they'd heard that so I'm not sure it's got any basis in fact.

More generally it is absolutely possible for a band to have multiple albums on different labels. For example Duff's band Loaded have 5 releases on 3 labels (Pimp Records for 99:Live and Dark Days, Century Media for Wasted Heart and Sick and Armoury Records for The Taking). Shortly after Sick was released Duff said he actually preferred to do a deal for just 1 album and then re-negotiate, with the same people or different ones, because he thought it worked out better for everyone. I wouldn't be at all surprised if issues with GnR and Velvet Revolver (who supposedly had a 3 album contract and had to negotiate getting out of it after the band fell apart) was behind that.

And then of course there's all the high profile cases of musicians who are angry because they signed a crap deal early in their career when they didn't think it would matter and years later they're fighting long, expensive legal battles to try and get back control of their early music, but have full control of the later stuff because they realised their mistake and switched labels.

[allwaystired]

I'd wager they are totally out of contract, reading through the above. If they were- there would be pressure, and there would inevitably be releases, even if of a low quality or dubious nature (Greatest Hits with slightly re-jigged setlist, etc).

[pilferk]

The rumor, waaaaaaaaaay back when they signed a supposedly renegotiated contract, was they signed for:

4 albums of new material
1 Live album
1 GH album

So 6 more albums total.

AFD, Lies and (I think) UYI were covered under/part of their original contract.

Since that was signed, they provided TSI (??), GnR Live Era, and GH (under protest).  If you read the litigation that surrounded the GH rumblings, it seems apparent that was NOT the end of their contract.  I don't think CD was, either, though there's no way to know for sure.

Depending on how they count TSI....that would leave 2 to 3 original albums left.

Now, all that is founded on rumor and speculation from an awful long time ago....but some of it was basically hinted at during the CD era Axl "QAs" on the various boards. 


We "know" according to Reckless Life by Marc Cantor, that their ORIGINAL contract was for 6 albums. The UYI albums would have gotten them to 4. I think you have to assume that the renegotiation included SOMETHING more than 4 more total albums, given their popularity, and, at the time, material count over a relatively short period of time.  The rumor always sounded right, to me.....

The thing is: With the dissolution of the original entity (when Slash and Duff "left") and reformation under Axl, did that contract transfer or did they renegotiate something new? We just don't really know. There's some breadcrumbs, but not enough to find the way through the forest.