Guns N' Roses Discussion Thread

We [Guns N’ Roses] are working on new stuff. I’ve got a lot of stuff together, and I played some stuff for Slash and Duff and they liked it.

We learnt in the press, that you asked the former members to sign a paper giving up the rights to the GUNS N' ROSES name and threatening not to go on stage unless they co-operated. Bull****?

So let's start here… the whole 'Axl wouldn't go on stage' yada yada… is complete and utter crap. Never happened, all made up, fallacy and fantasy. Not one single solitary thread of truth to it. Had that been the case, I would've have been cremated years ago legally, could've cleaned me out for the name and damages. It's called under duress with extenuating circumstances. In fact, the time that was mentioned, the attorneys were all in Europe with us dealing with Adler [original GUNS N' ROSES drummer Steven Adler] depositions.

Couldn't talk sooner as it could have jeopardized whatever nonsense was going on.

When GUNS renegotiated our contract with Geffen, I had the bit about the name added in as protection for myself as I had come up with the name and then originally started the band with it. It had more to do with management than the band, as our then-manager was always tryin' to convince someone they should fire me. As I had stopped speaking with him, he sensed his days were numbered and was bending any ear he could along with attempting to sell our renegotiation out for a personal payday from Geffen.

It was added to the contract and everyone signed off on it. It wasn't hidden in fine print, etc., as you had to initial the section verifying you had acknowledged it.

Now, at that time I didn't know or think about brand names or corporate value etc. All I knew is that I came in with the name and from day one everyone had agreed to it being mine should we break up and now it was in writing.

I still didn't grasp any other issues until long after I'd left and formed a new partnership which was only an effort to salvage GUNS, not steal it.

In my opinion, the reality of the shift and the public embarrassment and ridicule by others (which included a lot of not-so-on-the-level business types he was associating with at the time) for not contesting the rights to the brand name, were more than Slash [former GUNS N' ROSES guitarist] could openly face. Also, we aren't lawyers or formally business educated, so it was just a matter of all of us being naïve and doing what we thought was right at the time. Slash was, in my opinion, being on the up and up in agreeing I had the rights, and I wasn't trying to be some snake in the grass pulling a fast one. The others could've cared less.

But when the reality of the breakup hit and the strategy to have me crawl back was put into play, Slash had to save face and get business team and public support. Painting me as the one who held a crowd hostage forcing the others to sign over the name worked out pretty well in that regard. I'm the bad guy, and Duff [McKagan, ex-GUNS bassist], the fans and most importantly himself were the victims. Oh, and they had actually made the sacrifice for the crowd, the people, the fans at the show. But again… IT NEVER HAPPENED.

Media and others ignorantly, wrongly and falsely harped on about it at mine and the fans' expense for years, and Slash has hoped to use all that to continually sue and have some sort of legal nonsense going on behind the scenes in an effort to reverse things. He wouldn't have been able to get the support and action on the part of his various team members over the years to do so if the truth were out there especially when the statute of limitations had run out years ago.

fin12 wrote: »

When I read Slash's book, think he's an asshole after reading it. Just trashing stuff for the sake of it. Does duff have a book?

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Good picture.

Itssoeasy wrote: »

It's like someone jumped into a delorian to 1993. I've only seen one YouTube video of live and let die. The scream that axl does on that song was definetely In "game shape" after the ac/dc shows.