New topic
PrintableAnxiety said: colorblu said: I can imagine what it'd be like to have thousands of thoughts and pictures being made of someone constantly. Aren't there senses that haven't yet been defined by science which connect us and communication from others on some level other than sight and sound? Thoughts travel even when the word is unspoken. Maybe he's been bombarded for too long and needs some space and rest.
 it's too late for him to expect the rest of the world to provide him with his space and rest. he needs to create that safe zone for himself, and if he really wants it, i do believe he can find it. other celebrities have walked away from fame and retired/taken sabbaticals, and i think it's a matter of defining what HE can do to buffer himself from the footnote in pop culture that he has become. if he really wants to experience a life outside of the fishbowl, he can do it. once the rest of the world sees he means business, i am certain he can find surroundings where people will respect his desire to be "just plain ol' prince", and he can do the work of figuring out how to express himself in a way that makes him feel comfortable. none of us can define that for him, and he can't force us to re-define all the years of appreciation we've built up for his work up to this point. if he wants a rest from celebrity, he can have it. this just is not the way to go about it. Exactly! Honestly, I thought he'd retire in '08 anyway. I know I would if I were him. He's been going non-stop since he was 19, he's more than earned the rest. If that's all he's after then he could have handled matters a whole hell of a lot differently. Shit, instead of booking the 21 days in London as he did. He could have announced his retirement...(you can bet I'd have found a way to London then) had a huge send off from the fans, moved on and everybody could have lived happily ever after. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
L4OATheOriginal said: unkemptpueblo said: dude, censorship is not cool. Its not up to the moderators to control anyones thoughts or creative expression. People have been making parodies of songs since forever(?), why is prince held to a different standard than anyone else? Sure, he may not like it. Im sure Abe Lincoln's descendants didnt wanna hear "Abraham Lincoln was a racist", but it didnt stop prince from singing it. Whats next, gag orders getting mailed to Weird Al? or will he sue jammie fox 4 the parodies on him during the living colour shows? Not even comparable ! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DexMSR said: I find it absolutely appalling and just plain ridiculous that Prince would stoop this low to further alienate an already deteriorating fan base. I am a continual fan of the music and his unequivocal talent, but his personal and narcissistic actions such as this recent one will surely question whether or not I continue to justifiably be a fan if he feels it necessary to attack a fan base that is doing absolutely nothing that can be deemed malicious or intentional to cause him any discourse whatsoever.
Right now I am really ashamed to be a fan of the man!! Sincerely, Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... Prince, in you I found a kindred spirit...Rest In Paradise. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: DexMSR said: I find it absolutely appalling and just plain ridiculous that Prince would stoop this low to further alienate an already deteriorating fan base. I am a continual fan of the music and his unequivocal talent, but his personal and narcissistic actions such as this recent one will surely question whether or not I continue to justifiably be a fan if he feels it necessary to attack a fan base that is doing absolutely nothing that can be deemed malicious or intentional to cause him any discourse whatsoever.
Right now I am really ashamed to be a fan of the man!! Sincerely, Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: colorblu said: I can imagine what it'd be like to have thousands of thoughts and pictures being made of someone constantly. Aren't there senses that haven't yet been defined by science which connect us and communication from others on some level other than sight and sound? Thoughts travel even when the word is unspoken. Maybe he's been bombarded for too long and needs some space and rest.
it's too late for him to expect the rest of the world to provide him with his space and rest. he needs to create that safe zone for himself, and if he really wants it, i do believe he can find it. other celebrities have walked away from fame and retired/taken sabbaticals, and i think it's a matter of defining what HE can do to buffer himself from the footnote in pop culture that he has become. if he really wants to experience a life outside of the fishbowl, he can do it. once the rest of the world sees he means business, i am certain he can find surroundings where people will respect his desire to be "just plain ol' prince", and he can do the work of figuring out how to express himself in a way that makes him feel comfortable. none of us can define that for him, and he can't force us to re-define all the years of appreciation we've built up for his work up to this point. if he wants a rest from celebrity, he can have it. this just is not the way to go about it. Free speech is the main issue and you make some good points. Prince doesn't seem to be making many points while using his right to free speech in this way. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: DexMSR said: I find it absolutely appalling and just plain ridiculous that Prince would stoop this low to further alienate an already deteriorating fan base. I am a continual fan of the music and his unequivocal talent, but his personal and narcissistic actions such as this recent one will surely question whether or not I continue to justifiably be a fan if he feels it necessary to attack a fan base that is doing absolutely nothing that can be deemed malicious or intentional to cause him any discourse whatsoever.
Right now I am really ashamed to be a fan of the man!! Sincerely, Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... i think i might be done with Prince.ORG don't want to be associated with this mob no more | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SexyBeautifulOne said: Anxiety said: it's too late for him to expect the rest of the world to provide him with his space and rest. he needs to create that safe zone for himself, and if he really wants it, i do believe he can find it. other celebrities have walked away from fame and retired/taken sabbaticals, and i think it's a matter of defining what HE can do to buffer himself from the footnote in pop culture that he has become. if he really wants to experience a life outside of the fishbowl, he can do it. once the rest of the world sees he means business, i am certain he can find surroundings where people will respect his desire to be "just plain ol' prince", and he can do the work of figuring out how to express himself in a way that makes him feel comfortable. none of us can define that for him, and he can't force us to re-define all the years of appreciation we've built up for his work up to this point. if he wants a rest from celebrity, he can have it. this just is not the way to go about it. Exactly! Honestly, I thought he'd retire in '08 anyway. I know I would if I were him. He's been going non-stop since he was 19, he's more than earned the rest. If that's all he's after then he could have handled matters a whole hell of a lot differently. Shit, instead of booking the 21 days in London as he did. He could have announced his retirement...(you can bet I'd have found a way to London then) had a huge send off from the fans, moved on and everybody could have lived happily ever after. i felt like he had found his peace during the first few years of this decade, during the early years of NPGMC and all the paisley park celebrations. he was creating music without an ear to commercial expectations and marketing it toward his fanbase. he was creating a space for his fans to interact with him - sometimes IN PERSON - and even creating multiple channels of dialog without attracting mainstream media attention. heck, most of the "mainstream" public thought he was dead or retired during these years. but he had to go for the golden ring and get the superstar status back. his decision. not a wrong decision. but now ya deal with the consequences.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SexyBeautifulOne said: PurpleCharm said: 
What does being a Prince fan for 29 years have to do with anything? I was saw Prince's ass in concert when he was on tour with Rick James, which was when...'79 or '80, so I go back as long as you do. The difference is I don't feel that Prince is PERSONALLY attacking me. Prince is not my friend, he isn't my daddy, he isn't my lover and he isn't a family member. I have no loyalty to Prince. I am just a random fan that enjoys his music and thinks he's fine.  Nothing more and nothing less. I will never get worked up over what he does.
[Edited 11/8/07 8:34am] I feel Prince is personally attacking my rights to free speech and I don't like it. If you've got no problems with it then that's good for you but I don't appreciate it and I'm going to be vocal about it. Until he comes out of hiding and deals with this mess, that ain't changing! Since Prince is not your Daddy, why are you all up in this thread, whining about what people are saying about him? [Edited 11/8/07 9:30am] I hope this all works out for you Sexy. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
psychodelicide said: jn2 said: Cryptic message on the 3121 website with sentences full of u, r, 2. He won't really answer because he knows he's wrong.
 You got that right! All the more our need to fight this, to show Prince just how wrong he really is.You know what would make me LMAO? If the Websheriff starts writing his letters in Princebonics. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: DexMSR said: I find it absolutely appalling and just plain ridiculous that Prince would stoop this low to further alienate an already deteriorating fan base. I am a continual fan of the music and his unequivocal talent, but his personal and narcissistic actions such as this recent one will surely question whether or not I continue to justifiably be a fan if he feels it necessary to attack a fan base that is doing absolutely nothing that can be deemed malicious or intentional to cause him any discourse whatsoever.
Right now I am really ashamed to be a fan of the man!! Sincerely, Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... Very well said.  Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... Thanks for the very articulate and well thought-out post.
The only comment I read that sticks in my craw a little is that of stepped-up moderation. To what extent do we step up what we will and won't allow to remain on a site like this? And I'm not just asking YOU this. I'm asking the other Org Mods this. I'm also asking MYSELF this. At some point, lines have to be drawn. What I may consider fair criticism, another mod may consider to be a threat or defamatory language. Or vice versa. And we all might agree on what standards the Org will uphold, but the site community may not end up agreeing with us. Or we'll have a situation of "if THIS comment can be snipped, then why aren't you snipping THAT comment?" Until all we're left with is a bunch of people posting stuff like: ...um.....hi? 
But on a personal level I do agree with your concern, and I tried to voice that in a post I wrote on this thread earlier today. We need to think about how we are viewed when we post in a public forum. We need to think about how the site is represented by us when we post. If not legally, then morally? Ethically? Asthetically? Spiritually? Hey, whatever it takes. There is a certain freedom which is implied on the Internet but that does not mean that we are exempt from policing ourselves. I'm thinking deeper than legal implications here. I'm talking about matters of conscience and personal standards. It sounds all hoity-toity for me to say that, and I'm sure I've unleashed my fair amount of snark on the Org over the years, but maybe if we can take something productive from all this, it's that we need to develop our own internal Web Sheriffs. Or something like that. [Edited 11/8/07 10:38am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I did some googling on web sheriff and came up with an interesting exchange between them and The Pirate Bay torrent site in 2005
The full exchange can be found half way down the follwing webpage under white stripes/web sheriff http://thepiratebay.org/legal Here is an extract, the web sheriff parts all have > before them > Whilst writing, we would further caution you against communicating > or otherwise posting any remarks that could be construed as being > defamatory of our clients (or Web Sheriff) or that could otherwise be > injurious to our clients' (or our) genuine business interests. > Similarly, we would inform you that the copyright in the Notification > and, indeed, this e-mail is vested in Web Sheriff and that, in the > event that you attempt to publish either the Notification or this > e-mail on your web-site (or elsewhere), appropriate action shall be > taken for infringement of our copyright (we trust, in this regard, > that you will concur that Sweden does recognise copyright). We trust, in this regard, that you will concur that publishing your e-mail is not in violation of Swedish copyright law. When our lawyer's hangover has passed, he will be more than happy to explain the juicy details to you. > Naturally and notwithstanding the foregoing, all accumulated rights > of our clients - including, but not limited to, the right to institute > proceedings against your company in the United States - remain > strictly reserved. You also have the right to institute sodomizing of yourself. Preferably with barbed wire, but retractable batons might also work if you push them far enough. > Yours sincerely, > > WEB SHERIFF I wanna be a cool WEB SHERIFF when I grow up. Do I get a shiny star and a six-shooter? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: babynoz said: Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... Very well said. Thanks bro...when you spend 20 years in courtrooms you pick up a thing or two.
Keep eating your Wheaties...looks like you'll be working your tail off for awhile.  Prince, in you I found a kindred spirit...Rest In Paradise. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Hey, I'm a little taken aback right now but that's about it. I'm hoping that the sabre rattling phase will give way to actual legal proceedings very soon because IMO, sufficient laws already exists and therefore, all that's left to be done is to have some precedent setting cases come to court complete with full discovery, evidence, depositions, etc, before an impartial jury. I don't favor a settlement because I think there are larger implications to these issues that need to be addressed in open court. Granted, it's easy for me to say being that I'm not the one having to scrape together the necessary resources. As I understand it other parties such as uptown have gone through similar legal proceedings and ended by reaching a settlement which is good for them but didn't do a lot with regards to setting any precedent which is why the issue has and will continue to resurface. So one of my questions is, are any of the principals involved with Princefansunited willing to prepare themselves for a protracted legal battle or is it a matter of calling each other's bluff and hoping the other side will blink first? If it's the latter that's all well and good but be aware that you'll more than likely be playing chicken on a recurring basis. Furthermore, It might be a good idea to step up the moderation due to some of the more inflammatory comments being made and an even better idea would be for individual members to treat freedom of speech as a precious commodity that should be used judiciously. Remember, a judge or an impartial jury is not going to take your 20+ years as a frustrated fan into consideration...all they will see if and when evidence is presented is a screenshot of the forum where people are using inflammatory language that includes the words "gun", "bullet" and "die". Any impartial entity could easily conclude from such rantings that Prince's concerns are justified on that basis alone. I would urge anyone who claims to support this cause to consider that anything posted in these forums is potential evidence at this point. That includes the various postings in the M&M forum where everybody seems to be running around with their hair on fire with everything from suggestions of tarring and feathering on one side to the other extreme of people practically vowing to sacrifice their first born to their guitar playing savior! Many of the comments posted put the fansites at risk of being viewed by any impartial entity as a bunch of lunatics. My position remains the same...I believe the best remedy is a court of law where the parties can be compelled to put all of their cards on the table along with supporting arguments. Inasmuch as this remedy already exists, swindlers who pass themselves off as an internet policing organizations should not be empowered. I appreciate that people are concerned and I support their right to comment but I'd still like to see folks take a collective deep breath and try real hard to look beyond Prince or any single individual and consider the implications of a corporate/politically controlled internet. We have already seen what it has meant for other media such as radio, television and print outlets. Is the internet the final frontier? The FCC is already trying to rush through legislation that will expand the power of corporate media. I believe that it is corporate/political interests that will ultimately be served by so-called internet policing organizations and not the interests of artists or ordinary people. Just sayin'... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Here is a report of what appears to be another web sheriff faux pas
The original article is available at: http://www.techcrunch.com...ner-music/ "Online music recommendation and sharing site Scouta has received a DMCA notice from IP enforcement group Web Sheriff, demanding that a White Stripes video hosted on YouTube and displayed on Scouta, be removed from Scouta due to copyright infringement. This despite the video being uploaded to YouTube by Warner Music, the White Stripes current record label according to Wikipedia. The issue differs from a similar dispute covered at TechDirt. Where as the legality of the content on YouTube was in question in that case, in Scouta’s situation the video was legally uploaded to YouTube by the rights holder, with full rights given for the video to be embedded in 3rd party sites. The stupidity of companies such as Web Sheriff apparently has no bounds with the DMCA notice sent to Scouta (pdf) failing to comply with the act. Web Sheriff failed to demonstrate where the original content could be viewed as required in a DMCA notice; simply they couldn’t demonstrate the source of the original content to demonstrate infringement because Scouta was showing the original content as legally uploaded by the rights holder. The notice demands that Scouta “Remove [the] Infringed Title(s) from Infringing File Location” despite Scouta not hosting the file (YouTube does). The act is clear that such notices should only be sent to those hosting infringing files; if the content did infringe the act (and it clearly doesn’t), then YouTube should have received the notice. The abuse of the DMCA by companies like Web Sheriff highlights the abject failure of the law. Startups such as Scouta and others should not have to be subjected to erroneous claims such as this one. There is an urgent need for America’s legislators to dump the DMCA into the realms of history where it rightly belongs." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
darrenj said: Markland said: If you take his photo you do not infringe his copyright unless there is a prior contract I strongly suggest you speak to someone who knows what they are talking about before coming out with what purports to be an authoritative statement that is incorrect Absolute rubbish !!! NO contract is needed !!!! If you take a photo of anyone without there permission and use it for publication without there permission you infringe there copyright. The same goes for video and audio. [Edited 11/7/07 11:35am] if u have ever been 2 paisley park, and have gone in2 where he would perform or just the dance floor, prior 2 going in there is a sign that reads that if u choose 2 enter, prince can b videotapping u and ur surrending ur rights 4 him 2 do whatever he hell he wants 2 do with the footage. my image was used during the celebration in 2002, now can i sue prince 4 using it? no i can't cause by entering the premises, i gave up those rights. how is that the same when his images which he releases 2 the masses only belongs 2 him? if i sing a prince lyric in public, do i owe him royalities? man, he has such an amazing body of music that it's sad to see him constrict it down to the basics. he's too talented for the lineup he's doing. estelle 81 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: SexyBeautifulOne said: Exactly! Honestly, I thought he'd retire in '08 anyway. I know I would if I were him. He's been going non-stop since he was 19, he's more than earned the rest. If that's all he's after then he could have handled matters a whole hell of a lot differently. Shit, instead of booking the 21 days in London as he did. He could have announced his retirement...(you can bet I'd have found a way to London then) had a huge send off from the fans, moved on and everybody could have lived happily ever after. i felt like he had found his peace during the first few years of this decade, during the early years of NPGMC and all the paisley park celebrations. he was creating music without an ear to commercial expectations and marketing it toward his fanbase. he was creating a space for his fans to interact with him - sometimes IN PERSON - and even creating multiple channels of dialog without attracting mainstream media attention. heck, most of the "mainstream" public thought he was dead or retired during these years. but he had to go for the golden ring and get the superstar status back. his decision. not a wrong decision. but now ya deal with the consequences.  I missed all of that! I joined the NPGMC the year he quit doing the celebrations.
 Just a momentary lapse into famdom. I'm back!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
L4OATheOriginal said: darrenj said: Absolute rubbish !!! NO contract is needed !!!! If you take a photo of anyone without there permission and use it for publication without there permission you infringe there copyright. The same goes for video and audio. [Edited 11/7/07 11:35am] if u have ever been 2 paisley park, and have gone in2 where he would perform or just the dance floor, prior 2 going in there is a sign that reads that if u choose 2 enter, prince can b videotapping u and ur surrending ur rights 4 him 2 do whatever he hell he wants 2 do with the footage. my image was used during the celebration in 2002, now can i sue prince 4 using it? no i can't cause by entering the premises, i gave up those rights. how is that the same when his images which he releases 2 the masses only belongs 2 him? if i sing a prince lyric in public, do i owe him royalities? I know the kind of notices you mean They are a contract also used at venues by film companies when a gig is to be filmed/recorded You enter into the contract when you enter the premises The usual "no photography" signs are wholly insufficient and dont constitute a contract | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
What appears to be another faux pas by web sheriff
http://dabble.com/blog/20...o-wrongly/ "Web Sheriff Asks Dabble to Remove a Video — Wrongly Thursday, July 5th, 2007 by Mary Hodder Duncan Riley at Techcrunch notes that Scouta received a DMCA Take Down Notice from Websherrif. Dabble received the same notice for the same video. Nice to see when this happens to others as well. Regarding the DMCA notice, we also noted that Web Sheriff didn’t comply with DMCA rules and not just because they pointed us to the correct and legal copy. We have a DMCA and copyright policy, and don’t allow people to email in requests like this because they can be forged and don’t have a real signature. Since we don’t host the video in question, Youtube does, we also don’t have the video itself to remove, just links and text around it. Additionally, Web Sheriff said that we were violating The White Stripes “copyright, trademark and moral rights.” Regarding the trademark, I would beg to differ. Dabble is a search engine, and therefore has “speech about things” but not the things themselves. Talking about something, correctly (as in the Dabble record they said was infringing the White Stripes trademark was actually a White Stripes video, put up by Warner Brothers) is not “causing confusion in the marketplace for users” which is usually the problem when trademark infringement occurs. Trademark protection is supposed to prevent brand confusion in the marketplace, among other things. There is a case, noted here: The NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK et. al. v. NEWS AMERICA PUBLISHING, INC. et. al." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: I"m laughing at the thought of Prince on Firefox with like 8 tabs open with a angry look on his face
Here's Prince: 
[Edited 11/8/07 11:20am] RIP, mom. I will forever miss and love you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Markland said: Here is a report of what appears to be another web sheriff faux pas
The original article is available at: http://www.techcrunch.com...ner-music/ "Online music recommendation and sharing site Scouta has received a DMCA notice from IP enforcement group Web Sheriff, demanding that a White Stripes video hosted on YouTube and displayed on Scouta, be removed from Scouta due to copyright infringement. This despite the video being uploaded to YouTube by Warner Music, the White Stripes current record label according to Wikipedia. The issue differs from a similar dispute covered at TechDirt. Where as the legality of the content on YouTube was in question in that case, in Scouta’s situation the video was legally uploaded to YouTube by the rights holder, with full rights given for the video to be embedded in 3rd party sites. The stupidity of companies such as Web Sheriff apparently has no bounds with the DMCA notice sent to Scouta (pdf) failing to comply with the act. Web Sheriff failed to demonstrate where the original content could be viewed as required in a DMCA notice; simply they couldn’t demonstrate the source of the original content to demonstrate infringement because Scouta was showing the original content as legally uploaded by the rights holder. The notice demands that Scouta “Remove [the] Infringed Title(s) from Infringing File Location” despite Scouta not hosting the file (YouTube does). The act is clear that such notices should only be sent to those hosting infringing files; if the content did infringe the act (and it clearly doesn’t), then YouTube should have received the notice. The abuse of the DMCA by companies like Web Sheriff highlights the abject failure of the law. Startups such as Scouta and others should not have to be subjected to erroneous claims such as this one. There is an urgent need for America’s legislators to dump the DMCA into the realms of history where it rightly belongs." Amen to that!! Who knows how to get in touch with former President Bill Clinton? He signed the DMCA into Law in 1998. I think he was clearly under duress from the Monica Lewinsky crap fest and not thinking straight! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
jn2 said: psychodelicide said: You got that right! All the more our need to fight this, to show Prince just how wrong he really is.You know what would make me LMAO? If the Websheriff starts writing his letters in Princebonics. That would be hella funny! RIP, mom. I will forever miss and love you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rhondab said: I think some are missing the point in regards to the "owe" us statements. I think that Prince has always missed the boat when its come to some business sense.
No Mars doesn't "owe" their consumers anything BUT its bad for BUSINESS to piss off the consumers. With Prince, its always in his approach. He is an idiot when it comes to how to handle his consumers. We, as consumers, are use to producers treating their consumers with some level of respect and gratitude because this is how they make their money, supply and demand. Its just a basic business model. I think what some also aren't getting that this really isn't about just copyright infringement. Personally, I think he wants these sites to close which takes us back to the collective days. This is just a backhanded way to finally come at the sites. I'm sure Mars wouldn't do this to their consumers. I don't hate Prince. I don't wish him ill will BUT I think he's never had great business skills. Good ideas but he's never really understood how to conduct business appropriately. well i truly agree with you I do think that underneath all this is Prince's desire to have the only site dedicated to himself. That way he can control what is said, what is posted and all that. But I will drop his ass forever than to be forced to give up my community so he can tell me what kinds of topics I can discuss and whether or not I can even quote any of his lyrics when talking about how the only thing I had in my lonely fucked up childhood was his music.
And I'm with sexyb1 and gemini, I'm a fan for 28 years and I'd hardly say that's a quick turning on of prince 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Question, are the moderators implicated for damages since they have the ability to edit posts? 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Question, are the moderators implicated for damages since they have the ability to edit posts?
i am a volunteer, not a proprietor. i don't invest in or benefit monetarily from this site. if someone's a volunteer usher for a community theater and they allow someone in who is carrying a firearm, is the volunteer usher liable or is the establishment liable should something happen as a result? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
If Prince doesn't want us around, why don't we just changed the name and tell him to fuck off? "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Question, are the moderators implicated for damages since they have the ability to edit posts?
i am a volunteer, not a proprietor. i don't invest in or benefit monetarily from this site. if someone's a volunteer usher for a community theater and they allow someone in who is carrying a firearm, is the volunteer usher liable or is the establishment liable should something happen as a result? well I'm not advocating that you are responsible, just not sure of the sherriff and Prince's twisted logic is all 2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
phineas said: m3taverse said: Yes I get it. But if it's up to Prince, his contribution doesn't stop there. He wants to control how, where and when we listen to said music, and how, where and when we talk about it with our friends. Do your NPGMC files still work? I didn't think so. That there proves that the essence of this discussion is not as straight forward as you are presenting it. I need to be able to use a product I payed for in any way I see fit, as well as being able to express views I hold on this product in any way I like. This is about total control by a centralized figure versus fair use and freedom of speech, get it? Well I checked the info offered by this site and apparently he wants these sites to 'cease and desist all use of photographs, images, lyrics, album covers and anything linked to Prince's likeness'. I don't believe it is possible for him to control whether or not we can talk about him or whether we share our pics with friends. I don't see the evidence to back up what you say about how he wants to tell us where and when and how we discuss his music. What he has proposed seems normal in terms of protecting a brand. You can't open the Elvis cafe can you? Why should you be able to start the Prince website? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: Anxiety said: i am a volunteer, not a proprietor. i don't invest in or benefit monetarily from this site. if someone's a volunteer usher for a community theater and they allow someone in who is carrying a firearm, is the volunteer usher liable or is the establishment liable should something happen as a result? well I'm not advocating that you are responsible, just not sure of the sherriff and Prince's twisted logic is all given that hypothetical of twisted logic, you could also ask if the individual people who post could be held liable for placing that "harmful content" online in the first place. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said: well i truly agree with you I do think that underneath all this is Prince's desire to have the only site dedicated to himself. That way he can control what is said, what is posted and all that. But I will drop his ass forever than to be forced to give up my community so he can tell me what kinds of topics I can discuss and whether or not I can even quote any of his lyrics when talking about how the only thing I had in my lonely fucked up childhood was his music.
And I'm with sexyb1 and gemini, I'm a fan for 28 years and I'd hardly say that's a quick turning on of prince There were a couple of quotes attributed to the MD of web sheriff along the lines of the artist not wanting his live performances represented by a load of grainy photos and if people wanted to see photos of the artist they could do so through his official website I've had quite a long look across the internet today and its almost scary the amount of publicity this issue has generated What is even more disturbing is the public outpouring of absolute contempt for prince by many of the posters Those supporting the actions of the people issuing these cease and desist notices are extremely thin on the ground If this affair was about a politician it would be nothing short of a public relations disaster The way its hit the media in such a negative way outside of the fanbase will almost certainly deter potential new fans from listening to subsequent material and taint the back catalogue | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |