independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > isnt pfunk the intellectual property of george clinton?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 11/20/07 4:25pm

DevotedPuppy

avatar

Graycap23 said:

U must be kidding.....pfunk is a WORD.


So is "Kleenex" but you can't just slap that name on anything and get away with it. It's trade-marked.

I bet if someone came out with and song entitled "Purple Rainman" Websheriff would be all over them like a fly on doody.
"Your presence and dry wit are appealing in a mysterious way."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 11/20/07 4:35pm

Graycap23

DevotedPuppy said:

Graycap23 said:

U must be kidding.....pfunk is a WORD.


So is "Kleenex" but you can't just slap that name on anything and get away with it. It's trade-marked.

I bet if someone came out with and song entitled "Purple Rainman" Websheriff would be all over them like a fly on doody.

hummmm.....kleenex is a Brand by a company selling tissues. Not the same thing. The "P" in pfunk can stand 4 anything. it can stand 4 Prince.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 11/20/07 5:01pm

realm

funkpill said:

blackguitaristz said:

P-Funk is short for Parliament/Funkadelic, which yes, are George Clinton creations.



That's right nod


Also stands for puriest form of funk cool


Ha! Too bad James Brown isn't still around. He could file lawsuit on Prince for stealing everything from him!!! He could put little P in his place.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 11/30/07 12:16pm

syble
okay guys

inerestin how its been released thru itunes as F.U.N.K tho!!

razz
walk with crooked shoes www.myspace/syblepurplelishous
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 11/30/07 1:29pm

Jatrig

syble said:

why is noone making a comment about my post heeelllooooo!!!!!



I don't understand WHY people keep suggesting Prince using the same title of a song as someone else, even if it is a band's name, is somehow infringing on someone's copyright!!!

Type in "I love you" into napster - and see how many songs are named "I love you" by how many different artists. There artist who first called a song this title doesn't somehow own the copyright to that phrase. Similarly, because someone named their band "PFUNK" or "The jelly fish" or whatever doesn't preclude anyone from writing a song that has a title of the same name!!!

Intellectual property is overused and stretched -- but it isn't THIS ridiculous!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > isnt pfunk the intellectual property of george clinton?