The obvious answer is "no"...and after seeing Axl at the video awards a couple of years ago, coupled with the fact that in the last few years he has been a disgrace to the memory of GNR to the extent that Slash and Duff are filing lawsuits weekly, I hope it never sees the light of day.

If we're lucky, Axl will jump out of a 15th story window onto a plate glass truck.

Syd Lexia wrote:

There have only been two lawsuits to my knowledge, one where they sued because Axl was refusing to whore out the songs and let them end up on any and every movie soundtrack.

And while I respect the fact that Axl may nit want his songs plastered on every soundtrack from here to kingdom come, he doesn't seem to respect the fact that as members of the band, Slash and Duff are more than entitled to have a say in how the songs are used. Black Hawk Down was going to pay a shitload of money for the song, and I'm sure there are lots of high-profile porducers that would be willing to pay through the nose for that music. Slash and Duff are entitled to decide to which movies they want to whore their music out, and they deserve to get paid for it. GNR wasn't and isn't Axl's band; it was their band.

And yes, Velvet Revolver sucks a huge nut. You may as well take the most generic STP song you can find and burn 12 copies of it onto a blank CD. It sounds exactly the same.

Syd Lexia wrote:

They definitely still collect royalties from the songs, but as ex-members they might have less claim over how they're used.

Listen, until Axl finally puts out an album, I consider them ALL ex-members.

If a band is formed, but they won't put out an album, does the band actually still exist?

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Many bands exist without putting out albums, especially new bands. That was a stupid comment and you're stupid for saying it. But as Syd was saying, the fact that Slash and Duff were in GNR doesn't mean that legally they have any say in if and how the songs are used. i don't know the details of who owns the rights to which songs, but I highly doubt that if someone wants to license a Black Sabbath song for something that they will EVER need to ask Dio's permission, even if he was in the band at one point.

Well, seeing as Slash and Duff went through the trouble of filing a lawsuit, then they must have some sort of legit gripe when it comes to royalties and licensing. Obviously, no one here is exactly sure what the rules are, so your severe doubtfulness about the situation makes you sound like a dick and makes your comment just as "stupid" as mine, apparently.

I should have clarified that bands who have already put out a first album are the groups I was talking about. In a band where every person is new except for Axl, and the imposter band is playing all of "their" old hits, and they aren't putting out anything new, does this band actually exist? And is Axl calling it GNR for any reason but to make cash off of old songs without having to put anything new out there? No one is going out to see GNR to hear unreleased songs off of Chinese Democracy; they're paying money to see a glorified tribute band with the same lead singer play songs that are a decade old. Hell, most people don't even expect C.D. to ever come out anyway. After how many people are replaced can you still call that band GNR? If Velvet Revolver started playing STP songs, can they be STP as long as they have Weiland as the lead singer? Maybe in a legal sense, but not in a musical one, and they'd get panned.

If Axl really wants this album to get released then he should abandon the GNR name and stop dragging it through the mud. Take your NEW band, pick a NEW name, and release Chinese Democracy.