I find this super surprising given that EVRYTHING ELSE is there

[Edited 12/14/16 9:47am]

Do they have bootleg info?

Or do you mean listed along with the live dates?

Noodled24 said:

Do they have bootleg info?

Or do you mean listed along with the live dates?

They weren't really allowed to list bootlegs (as in the releases themselves) in P's lifetime: Uptown had been legally banned from doing so by a judge.

I meant just a list of the recordings in a proper rehearsal section, which they are allowed to do.

Similarly listing the unreleased versions' lenght when circulating would have been great.

I wonder if those 2 things have been overlooked or if it's a decision and if so why.

PrinceVault, while extensive, and presumably a charitable effort to the fan community, is neither exhaustive nor accurate on all points.

.

Some of its [unnamed] contributors, editors, and moderators engage in the very behavior that makes anything wiki-related a troubling source for authoritative information.

.

[Edited 12/14/16 14:36pm]

PV has a number of things that I have come across that are somewhat inaccurate, like setlists or personnel. But those are the extreme minority. Much of it is on point, and I thank those that toiled to make it so great. if I want to research something, I find a mix of the pvault, p-live, and 4dafunk generally answer any question.

as to soundcheck and rehearsals ... dates and even setlists are very suspect due to the boot companies that mix and match whatever they wanted. More often than not, pvault has it listed if its verifiable.

That said, I miss thedigitalgarden. That was my fourth reference point.

databank said:

Noodled24 said:

Do they have bootleg info?

Or do you mean listed along with the live dates?

They weren't really allowed to list bootlegs (as in the releases themselves) in P's lifetime: Uptown had been legally banned from doing so by a judge.

.

Oh for crying out loud, don't post bullshit.

imprimis said:

PrinceVault, while extensive, and presumably a charitable effort to the fan community, is neither exhaustive nor accurate on all points.

.

Some of its [unnamed] contributors, editors, and moderators engage in the very behavior that makes anything wiki-related a troubling source for authoritative information.

.

[Edited 12/14/16 14:36pm]

AFAIK they are being as accurate and honest in their decisions as can be. The occasionnal error is the product of human mistake much more than a lack of ethics. Obviously with that amount of date it's hard to avoid mistakes, but they r usually small ones.

InwardJim said:

PV has a number of things that I have come across that are somewhat inaccurate, like setlists or personnel. But those are the extreme minority. Much of it is on point, and I thank those that toiled to make it so great. if I want to research something, I find a mix of the pvault, p-live, and 4dafunk generally answer any question.

as to soundcheck and rehearsals ... dates and even setlists are very suspect due to the boot companies that mix and match whatever they wanted. More often than not, pvault has it listed if its verifiable.

That said, I miss thedigitalgarden. That was my fourth reference point.

I am not familiar with P-live and 4dafunk (save for the boot label of course)

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

They weren't really allowed to list bootlegs (as in the releases themselves) in P's lifetime: Uptown had been legally banned from doing so by a judge.

.

Oh for crying out loud, don't post bullshit.

I'm surprised u don't know this but please refrain from accusing me of all people of posting BS when u perfectly know I don't, save ur breath for those new fools who come here to call historic members names, as I've just been on another thread.

After publishing the special bootlegs issue in the mid 90's, Uptown Magazine was sued by Prince for more or less "promoting bootlegs". The court forced an agreement on both parties saying that while Uptown couldn't anymore review bootlegs (as in "commercial" releases, with titles), they couldn't be prevented from reviewing circulating unauthorized recordings as long as they didn't mention the releases they were featured on. As a consequence that special bootlegs issue (or were there 2 of them?) wasn't included in the CD-Rom that was included with one of the later books with all the back issues. This is public knowledge for those of us who were there at the time.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on some of the details, this is all from memory, but I believe this is the story.

InwardJim said:

PV has a number of things that I have come across that are somewhat inaccurate, like setlists or personnel. But those are the extreme minority. Much of it is on point, and I thank those that toiled to make it so great. if I want to research something, I find a mix of the pvault, p-live, and 4dafunk generally answer any question.

as to soundcheck and rehearsals ... dates and even setlists are very suspect due to the boot companies that mix and match whatever they wanted. More often than not, pvault has it listed if its verifiable.

That said, I miss thedigitalgarden. That was my fourth reference point.

Yes, me too. Anyone have news about the possibility of a return?

databank said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Oh for crying out loud, don't post bullshit.

I'm surprised u don't know this but please refrain from accusing me of all people of posting BS when u perfectly know I don't, save ur breath for those new fools who come here to call historic members names, as I've just been on another thread.

After publishing the special bootlegs issue in the mid 90's, Uptown Magazine was sued by Prince for more or less "promoting bootlegs". The court forced an agreement on both parties saying that while Uptown couldn't anymore review bootlegs (as in "commercial" releases, with titles), they couldn't be prevented from reviewing circulating unauthorized recordings as long as they didn't mention the releases they were featured on. As a consequence that special bootlegs issue (or were there 2 of them?) wasn't included in the CD-Rom that was included with one of the later books with all the back issues. This is public knowledge for those of us who were there at the time.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on some of the details, this is all from memory, but I believe this is the story.

I have that issue (Maybe 2 of them: that was so good back then but not so much anymore.)

as far as the settlement goes that sounds like an out of court deal and even if it was a court ruling unless it was appealed it would not set case law. So any such judgment would have no legal weight on that princevault does.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

databank said:

I'm surprised u don't know this but please refrain from accusing me of all people of posting BS when u perfectly know I don't, save ur breath for those new fools who come here to call historic members names, as I've just been on another thread.

After publishing the special bootlegs issue in the mid 90's, Uptown Magazine was sued by Prince for more or less "promoting bootlegs". The court forced an agreement on both parties saying that while Uptown couldn't anymore review bootlegs (as in "commercial" releases, with titles), they couldn't be prevented from reviewing circulating unauthorized recordings as long as they didn't mention the releases they were featured on. As a consequence that special bootlegs issue (or were there 2 of them?) wasn't included in the CD-Rom that was included with one of the later books with all the back issues. This is public knowledge for those of us who were there at the time.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on some of the details, this is all from memory, but I believe this is the story.

I have that issue (Maybe 2 of them: that was so good back then but not so much anymore.)

as far as the settlement goes that sounds like an out of court deal and even if it was a court ruling unless it was appealed it would not set case law. So any such judgment would have no legal weight on that princevault does.

Look on how Prince.org's mods r excessively paranoid: in P's world jurisprudence rules.

databank said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I have that issue (Maybe 2 of them: that was so good back then but not so much anymore.)

as far as the settlement goes that sounds like an out of court deal and even if it was a court ruling unless it was appealed it would not set case law. So any such judgment would have no legal weight on that princevault does.

Look on how Prince.org's mods r excessively paranoid: in P's world jurisprudence rules.

I am thinking that has more to do with not wanting to even try to fight it... i am sure prince's people or prince himself contacted ben or the mods about stuff posted here. I know there used to be many photos of prince and the all went away one day. and the old thing about not posting links to his music was something from them.

Prince did manage to get several sites closed *housequake* i think Ben and the mods went out of their way to avoid issues. the fact that this site has out lasted all other sites (including prince's own) (and no AMP don't count) testifies to that.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

databank said:

Look on how Prince.org's mods r excessively paranoid: in P's world jurisprudence rules.

I am thinking that has more to do with not wanting to even try to fight it... i am sure prince's people or prince himself contacted ben or the mods about stuff posted here. I know there used to be many photos of prince and the all went away one day. and the old thing about not posting links to his music was something from them.

Prince did manage to get several sites closed *housequake* i think Ben and the mods went out of their way to avoid issues. the fact that this site has out lasted all other sites (including prince's own) (and no AMP don't count) testifies to that.

Which is why Princevault, an offspring of Uptowns, didn't want to play with fire

databank said:

After publishing the special bootlegs issue in the mid 90's, Uptown Magazine was sued by Prince for more or less "promoting bootlegs".

.

Wrong. Details of the suit are easily obtained.

.

The court forced an agreement on both parties

.

Wrong. That's you making shit up.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Prince did manage to get several sites closed *housequake*

.

HQ closed because the guy running it was sick of all the stupid hassle from the Prince camp.

BartVanHemelen said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Prince did manage to get several sites closed *housequake*

.

HQ closed because the guy running it was sick of all the stupid hassle from the Prince camp.

yeah... kind of what i said... and what has been said before. it is not that prince ever had a solid case but that it was too much of a hassle to fight it. the fact that prince could out spend most people is something those people had to consider.

now did Prince actually directly cause it to close? no...but as you have said it would not have closed when it did (talking about the website not it current form) if not for harassment from Prince. Thus indirectly Prince caused the site to close.

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

.

Wrong. Details of the suit are easily obtained.

.

The court forced an agreement on both parties

.

Wrong. That's you making shit up.

That's what I remember. Now I as said I may misremember. I know you don't make up shit so I'm not gonna claim I'm right and u're wrong, but please then just don't be a dick and tell us what really happened. You and I are on the same side: facts (and, according to some, bad manners ), do we now have to fight or can we agree on just correcting each other when one of us is wrong?