NighTrain Station Guns N' Roses

Slash widział się z Axlem. Reunion:D

żartujesz   to potwierdzone? tzn,. to, że się spotkali? jak, gdzie, kiedy?

[edit:] już znam odpowiedzi :]

Podzielcie się tymi odpowiedziami,z ludźmi,którzy nie znają tak dobrze angielskiego.

Wygląda na to,że część odnosząca się do wizyty Slasha i jego opinii o VR jest nie prawdziwa.
O czym mówi reszta artykułu? Znajdzie się ktoś kto zna na tyle dobrze angielski?
Wygląda mi na to,że Axl raz na zawsze chce załatwić sprawy pozwów,ale co,jak?

Artykuł w oryginalnej wersji,bez wstawek o wizycie Slasha i opiniach o VR znajduje się rzekomo tu:

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/h...*N-1002313*ZAxl

Blabbermouth i sp1at zrobiły własną wersję...

Nie jestem w stanie się zalogowac tam,ale ktoś na mygnrforum podał prawdziwa treść.

Axl Rose Responds to Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 6, 2006--W. Axl Rose, on Friday March 3, 2006 responded to one of Saul "Slash" Hudson's baseless lawsuits by filing a counterclaim asking the Federal Court to confirm his ownership of his own creative works. Slash and Michael "Duff" McKagan had previously filed cases both in Federal Court and in the Los Angeles Superior Court making numerous false allegations about Axl. Mr. Rose believes that once apprised of the true facts the Judge or Jury deciding these lawsuits will rule in Axl's favor on every issue before them.

More surprising to Axl are recent media reports that Slash (Saul Hudson) is claiming that he has always been supportive of Axl Rose and the new Guns N' Roses. Slash's actions in recent years have in fact been anything but supportive. Besides the lawsuits filed against Axl Rose, claiming, among other things, that Axl does not own the copyright in the songs that Axl co-authored with his former Guns N' Roses band mates, Slash has continually made negative and malicious statements about Axl in order to garner publicity for himself.


As an example the Federal lawsuit Hudson and McKagan filed was based on a faulty premise from the start. What Hudson and McKagan attempted to portray as egregious misconduct by Axl was in fact -- as Slash and Duff have learned -- nothing more than a clerical error committed by ASCAP. Had Slash and Duff or their representatives bothered to pick up the phone the clerical error could have been easily sorted out without the need for filing an utterly baseless lawsuit which one can only assume had been filed for the purposes of self-publicity at Axl's expense.

The lawsuit also attacks Axl's integrity as Slash and Duff, in a vindictive attempt to aggrandize their own stature, re-write history through false statements, which have been repeated by the media. Their attacks on Axl stand in sharp contrast to Rose's conduct. Axl has at all times worked diligently to maintain the artistic integrity of the band by choosing with great care which properties to license Guns N' Roses songs to and refusing to participate in what he believed were potentially embarrassing projects. He has fought to avoid the release of material that does not live up to the highest of standards demanded by the band's history and it's followers. Axl chose not to respond through the media while taking the high road in the face of Slash and Duff's attacks. Hudson and McKagan, by contrast, have told ever changing - and false - stories regarding the formation of the band and it's history and believe that the band's catalogue should be exploited without careful consideration - for the Guns N' Roses brand and their loyal audience - or Axl's input as if it were fast food by anyone willing to pay for it.

For over 10 years Slash, a consummate press, photo and media opportunist and manipulator, has attacked Axl Rose on a number of levels. Slash's actions whether in or out of Gun's N' Roses have been a complete betrayal across the board of his alleged friendship and business relationship with Axl and the so called brotherhood and band loyalties that are supposed to have existed. Instead Slash has publicly attempted, by soliciting public and media support, to take credit for something that was not his or anyone else's to take, notwithstanding that Slash played a major part in the success of the band as Axl has continually acknowledged.

Mr. Rose's attorney Howard Weitzman commented, "Axl regrets having to spend time and energy on these distractions but he has a responsibility to protect the Guns N' Roses legacy and expose the truth. Axl believes he has been left with no alternative but to respond to these lawsuits. It would have been Axl's preference to resolve disputes with Slash and Duff in private. The courthouse is not his choice of forum. However, Axl could no longer sit quietly and allow the continuing dissemination of falsehoods and half-truths by his former band-mates."

Jest na sali tłumacz?

Czemu niemożliwa głupota? Póki co ja za bardzo nie wiem o co w tym chodzi,oprócz tego,że Axl wreszcie zdecydował się zrobić coś z pozwami i wystąpił do sądu o udowodnienie,że piosenki,które napisał są jego własnością. Tak mniej więcej.Ale za dużo nie wiem.Tłumacz jakiś się znajdzie?

Blabbermouth i sp1at zrobiły własną wersję...

A jutro rano napisze o tym jeszcze Onet, bo zazwyczaj powołuje się na Blabbermouth  
Cóż, widać, że komuś się nudzi czekanie na ChD, więc wymyśla niestworzone historie.
Poza tym..., tak na zdrowy rozum. Slash jest z natury lojalnym człowiekiem. To zupełnie nie w jego stylu, żeby iść do kogoś (a tym bardziej do Axla Rose, z którym 10 lat nie rozmwiał) i wyżalać mu się, że nienawidzi Matta, że Weiland jest oszustem,... a za chwilę wracać do VR i grać z nimi. Zgadzam się z wszystkimi, którzy uważają tę "informację" za całkowita bzdurę. W sumie nie ma o czym dyskutować :l

OK,ale niezależnie od bzdur o Slashu i VR zostaje całkiem spora częśc artykułu o tym,co Axl zamierza zrobić z pozwami. Blabbermouth i sp1at dodali swoje trzy grosze do artykułu o pozwach.Szukanie sensacji,w i tak ciekawym artykule,bez sensu trochę,ale cóż. Tymczasem próbuję zrozumiec część o pozwach.

prosze bardzo - niech ktoś to ładnie przetłumaczy ;>;>