let these douchebags keep it up, it's only a matter of time before (former) prince fans organize a boycott of his albums and shows.

this is the letter...

Geezuz

True, prince is the only loser.

SquirrelMeat said:

RodeoSchro said:

I know you're angry, but let's keep it civil on here. Thanks

Tom said:

Damn Right! Tell'em Tom!

RodeoSchro said:

The web sheriff once told me that best part of about being able to fuck yourself is that you never have to worry about looking your best.
He then added that,
in order to refrain from taking this ability for granted, though,
one should do something nice for oneself,
like sending oneself some flowers right afterwards.
But,
if you ask me,
he stole that second part from Oprah.

"Similarly, we would remind you that this communication is the copyright of Web Sheriff and, as such, any publication and / or dissemination to third parties would be actionable."

I didnt know you could copyright an email.....

I thought that once any communication is sent/posted doesnt it then belong to the sender anymore....

JOYJOY said:

In other words, they are saying "please don't let others know what douchebags we are"...

So help me out on this.. Is it correct to post the letter here or is this yet again a breaking of one of their "rules"?

VenusBlingBling said:

The copyright comment seems to be a Web Sheriff threat that has no basis in actual Law
(I just had word with the Legal department at the production company I work for)
So showing the letter is not breaking any 'rules' as PFU has no contract or agreement with WS.

JOYJOY said:

Ok, thank you.

RodeoSchro said:

Tom said:

jecica said:[quote]http://torrentfreak.com/prince-hires-web-sheriff-t0-take-on-the-pirate-bay-070914/

Here is an article about the web sheriff and how the torrent companies laugh at him. Lawyers looking for a buck.....


"In a move which shows that Prince (or at least his advisers) have a sense of humor, they have hired the infamous Web Sheriff (a division of Entertainment Law Associates), headed up by John Giacobbi to deal with the enforcement. They send out letters like this one - the site in question is of course, still up and running."


Oh this site is fantastic! I laughed my arse off when I read the letters and emails that went on between The Pirate Bay and Web Sheriff - absolute class!

Thank you so much Jecica - reading that made me feel much better...

luv4u said:

What about all the names Prince has been called? How is THAT civil?

The Web Sheriff missed the other times Prices sued fan sites and the time he sicked him goons on fans for taking his photo in public. The statement is not only true but an understatement. They would be better served if they did SOME research into their clients privous legal actions. He has been know as sue happy for ages.




You do not have to prove a belief in order to state it.



Hopes like beliefs are just that, and is not a statement of fact.

This is such a joke and, IMO, potentially actionable.

malicious prosecution n. filing a lawsuit with the intention of creating problems for the defendant such as costs, attorneys fees, anguish, or distraction when there is no substantial basis for the suit. If the defendant in the lawsuit wins, and has evidence that the suit was filed out of spite and without any legal or factual foundation, he/she may, in turn, sue for damages against the person who filed the original action. If malice is clearly proved against the party who brought the original suit, punitive damages may be awarded along with special and general damages. In recent cases, courts have ruled that an attorney who knowingly assists a client in filing a worthless lawsuit out of malice or spite may be liable for damages along with the client. The suit by the victim to recover damages for a malicious prosecution cannot be filed until the original law suit is decided in favor of the victim.

Tom said:

That's the ticket.

andykeen said:

yes you own it, but he will most likely allege you have violated his right of publicity if you publish it.

txladykat said:

but if it was taken in a public place doesnt that mean you own the image no matter whose in the image?

oldpurple said:

You own the image but you dont have any distribution rights for that image (unless you apply for them)

JOYJOY said:

wh odo you apply to?