TheFreakerFantastic said:

^ Read my post on the original thread, I explain it there - basically very unlikely that you can sue people without knowing their true identity (a website or blog name won't do) or prove that you lost $1 million through just posting a link to a download - the techdirt article elaborates on this too.

[Edited 1/30/14 13:22pm]

dont care about tech dirt, we are talking legal analysis. If what you say is true, all those sites would be upo and running status quo since he has no legal standing. Better yet, you take a risk and start a blog that has bootlegs and see if your thesis stands

^ Erm, that article on techdirt was based on a legal analysis, I suggest you read it. The reason they got taken down is because the users understandably didn't want to take the risk but that doesn't mean it was a valid case.

[Edited 1/30/14 14:12pm]

TheFreakerFantastic said:

^ Erm, that article on techdirt was based on a legal analysis, I suggest you read it. The reason they got taken down is because the users understandably didn't want to take the risk but that doesn't mean it was a valid case.

[Edited 1/30/14 14:12pm]

you make no sense, if its not valid, at least 1 of the 22 would have told him to pound sand dont you think..Also, my friend there is always a plantiff and a defendant, Just because techdirt says it does not make it true. their agenda is to fall on the side of open source technology for all, screw ip and copyright laws. so please dont sit here and tell me about techdirt

it was a dick move...sorry.

i just don't understand how a beloved musical figure can hate his fans so much?

how about releasing a live DVD/Blu Ray or some sh!t? Not all of us can pay $250 for a ticket.

i've f*cked with this dude since day 1, and cannot be more disenchanted than am I right now.

(venting over)

mschirmer said:

I'm sorry but Prince is an asshole. I love the man but he has steamrolled his career into the ground with all these petty copyright lawsuits. If he spent just a quarter of the energy he does sending his dogs after people on YouTube, etc. the man might have been able to remain a relevant recording artist. It's so sad. The only people who have a grasp on his contribution to pop culture are the select few that experienced it 30 years ago. The younger generation doesn't have a clue because they can't explore his career like they can everyone else. So all they have is his new music and the shitty Purple Rain clips that have been played into the ground. It's as if he didn't exist and when he dies, it will look like he only recorded one album and a few singles. I have younger friends that have no clue about his career because they cAnt check him out anywhere online. Prince needs to stop looking on the mirror and start opening his heart and mind.

+1 ..... ! I've discovered new artist to support just by randomly clicking stuff on youtube. Genres of music that doesn't even get played on the radio here in Minneapolis. I couldn't agree with you more about the younger folks too.

stinka said:

it was a dick move...sorry.

i just don't understand how a beloved musical figure can hate his fans so much?

how about releasing a live DVD/Blu Ray or some sh!t? Not all of us can pay $250 for a ticket.

i've f*cked with this dude since day 1, and cannot be more disenchanted than am I right now.

(venting over)

dick move yes, it has legal merit though

If this dude released a 3 show live dvd with high production quality, and fair price, on Itunes right now I'd break my damn finger clicking the purchase button. Stop suing and just do it!

stinka said:

stinka said:

lwr001 said:

TheFreakerFantastic said:

^ Erm, that article on techdirt was based on a legal analysis, I suggest you read it. The reason they got taken down is because the users understandably didn't want to take the risk but that doesn't mean it was a valid case.

[Edited 1/30/14 14:12pm]

you make no sense, if its not valid, at least 1 of the 22 would have told him to pound sand dont you think..Also, my friend there is always a plantiff and a defendant, Just because techdirt says it does not make it true. their agenda is to fall on the side of open source technology for all, screw ip and copyright laws. so please dont sit here and tell me about techdirt

So you still haven't read it then...the article was nothing to do with tech they basically got a lawyer to look at it and they concluded it wasn't legally sound.

Oh well, it's plain to see this was not a serious attempt, it was far too vague and the $1 million figure came out of nowhere. It would never have got to court regardless, it was far too sloppy and vague and no research seemed to have been done as to who the actual perpetrators were and the negative publicity would not have been worth it.

[Edited 1/31/14 2:16am]

TheFreakerFantastic said:

lwr001 said:

you make no sense, if its not valid, at least 1 of the 22 would have told him to pound sand dont you think..Also, my friend there is always a plantiff and a defendant, Just because techdirt says it does not make it true. their agenda is to fall on the side of open source technology for all, screw ip and copyright laws. so please dont sit here and tell me about techdirt

So you still haven't read it then...the article was nothing to do with tech they basically got a lawyer to look at it and they concluded it wasn't legally sound.

Oh well, it's plain to see this was not a serious attempt, it was far too vague and the $1 million figure came out of nowhere. It would never have got to court regardless, it was far too sloppy and vague and no research seemed to have been done as to who the actual perpetrators were and the negative publicity would not have been worth it.

[Edited 1/31/14 2:16am]

Once again, just cuz a lawyer says it does it make it true, there are always opposing views and in court. What credibilty do you have to say whats sloppy or vague. You would serve yourself better just saying you disagree with it. If what you oand techdirt hold as true Dabang and all those other would be back on line as we speak; they arent.. Was discovery done yet? If not, you have no idea what they had

Meanwhile, starting today, Bruce Springteen is offering his fans direct audio live content (on MP3 or FLAC) through his official site. That's business smarts.

Identity said:

Meanwhile, starting today, Bruce Springteen is offering his fans direct audio live content (on MP3 or FLAC) through his official site. That's business smarts.

Prince has given away plenty of free tracks just this year. Basically for fans only. He does it on a regular basis.

V10LETBLUES said:

Identity said:

Meanwhile, starting today, Bruce Springteen is offering his fans direct audio live content (on MP3 or FLAC) through his official site. That's business smarts.

Prince has given away plenty of free tracks just this year. Basically for fans only. He does it on a regular basis.

We're talking here about FULL SHOWS in perfect quality, lossless files. For every concert of this tour. When was the last time prince did that? We get snippets of songs filmed with a shaky cam and the sound isn't from the soundboard. It's better than nothing, but there's still a big difference.

ludwig said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Prince has given away plenty of free tracks just this year. Basically for fans only. He does it on a regular basis.

We're talking here about FULL SHOWS in perfect quality, lossless files. For every concert of this tour. When was the last time prince did that? We get snippets of songs filmed with a shaky cam and the sound isn't from the soundboard. It's better than nothing, but there's still a big difference.

Prince is pretty generous releasing free music. Today he makes his money from concerts, I think you may understand why he would be unwilling to release them for free. It's obvious he will eventually release his concert, we just have to wait for that day.

V10LETBLUES said:

ludwig said:

We're talking here about FULL SHOWS in perfect quality, lossless files. For every concert of this tour. When was the last time prince did that? We get snippets of songs filmed with a shaky cam and the sound isn't from the soundboard. It's better than nothing, but there's still a big difference.

Prince is pretty generous releasing free music. Today he makes his money from concerts, I think you may understand why he would be unwilling to release them for free. It's obvious he will eventually release his concert, we just have to wait for that day.

No he's not willing. Or else he would've done it already. Bruce Springsteen ist just one of numerous examples of artists who are willing. These downloads are not for free, and that's totally ok. I would pay the same prices for every concert that prince would put up. And that'd be the better way to act against bootleggers: in providing the better product, and he would make some money. But instead he sits on his material for decades and ignores the demands of his most devoted fans. It's no wonder that they are so frustrated.

ludwig said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Prince is pretty generous releasing free music. Today he makes his money from concerts, I think you may understand why he would be unwilling to release them for free. It's obvious he will eventually release his concert, we just have to wait for that day.

No he's not willing. Or else he would've done it already. Bruce Springsteen ist just one of numerous examples of artists who are willing. These downloads are not for free, and that's totally ok. I would pay the same prices for every concert that prince would put up. And that'd be the better way to act against bootleggers: in providing the better product, and he would make some money. But instead he sits on his material for decades and ignores the demands of his most devoted fans. It's no wonder that they are so frustrated.

frustration makes folks violate copyright laws etc..I've been eating at Mortons steak house and drinking dunkin donuts coffee religiously for over 20 years. Based of that, what do they owe me and better yett what should i go take for free because they refuse to meet what i think they should be giving me

EvilAngel said:

He's ust not interesting to me anymore. He hurts people, including those close to him. So why should he ind hurting his fans?

SchlomoThaHomo said:

EvilAngel said:

He's still a dick.

Case closed.

lol

thedance said:

soooooo?????

This was all just a publicity stunt.

Just to get the media attention.

F*ck you, Prince.

.

[Edited 1/29/14 1:41am]

Prince and his jokes....he's the man that you love 2 hate!!!!

funkyrake said:

He's ust not interesting to me anymore. He hurts people, including those close to him. So why should he ind hurting his fans?

where is he "hurting" THOSE "fans"?.... gain an alternate perspective

lwr001 said:

TheFreakerFantastic said:

So you still haven't read it then...the article was nothing to do with tech they basically got a lawyer to look at it and they concluded it wasn't legally sound.

Oh well, it's plain to see this was not a serious attempt, it was far too vague and the $1 million figure came out of nowhere. It would never have got to court regardless, it was far too sloppy and vague and no research seemed to have been done as to who the actual perpetrators were and the negative publicity would not have been worth it.

[Edited 1/31/14 2:16am]

Once again, just cuz a lawyer says it does it make it true, there are always opposing views and in court. What credibilty do you have to say whats sloppy or vague. You would serve yourself better just saying you disagree with it. If what you oand techdirt hold as true Dabang and all those other would be back on line as we speak; they arent.. Was discovery done yet? If not, you have no idea what they had

ludwig said:

RodeoSchro said:

Clearly if Prince feels like he's been damaged to the tune of $20 million+, that should tell him there is a market for all those bootlegs and soundboard recordings he has.

A $20+ million market, to be exact.

Prince could learn a lot from Bruce Springsteen.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/bruce-springsteens-instant-bootleg-series-new-details-revealed-20140122

lwr001 said:

TheFreakerFantastic said:

So you still haven't read it then...the article was nothing to do with tech they basically got a lawyer to look at it and they concluded it wasn't legally sound.

Oh well, it's plain to see this was not a serious attempt, it was far too vague and the $1 million figure came out of nowhere. It would never have got to court regardless, it was far too sloppy and vague and no research seemed to have been done as to who the actual perpetrators were and the negative publicity would not have been worth it.

[Edited 1/31/14 2:16am]

Once again, just cuz a lawyer says it does it make it true, there are always opposing views and in court. What credibilty do you have to say whats sloppy or vague. You would serve yourself better just saying you disagree with it. If what you oand techdirt hold as true Dabang and all those other would be back on line as we speak; they arent.. Was discovery done yet? If not, you have no idea what they had

Understandably they probably don't want to the take the risk anymore, however now Prince has said publicly (at the London press conference) that he doesn't mind fans sharing music, (just scalping him) which is fair enough.

Still it just looked sloppy to me and the amount came out of nowhere. It was scare tactics and it seemed to work but I also feel for the people that ran those sites as from what I could see many actually had good intentions as they were sharing the music not charging for it.

TheFreakerFantastic said:

Still it just looked sloppy to me and the amount came out of nowhere.

It would have been a fictional number created to account for damages on projected income loss from the spread of unauthorized recordings.

Half of it is to identify who is doing it. Hoping you can track down the source.

It's also got to drive an artist crazy to know they can't control their output.... that there are people with pristine copies of archival materials you probably don't even have, has got to put someone like Prince over the edge. It used to be grainy video or crappy tapes, but now you have professionally transfered material, of recordings floating around, and it means the original source is still actively distributing it. The other thing is, it's likely that Prince himself leaked some stuff, and the lawsuit was intended to take control over his own bootleg market.