Prince threatens to sue his fans over online images

Owen Gibson, media correspondent
Wednesday November 7, 2007
The Guardian UK

He's a singer who has made some odd career moves in his time, from changing his name to an unpronounceable love symbol to scrawling "slave" on his cheek in protest at his record company.

But industry experts yesterday warned that Prince's latest decision might be the most controversial of all.

He has threatened to sue thousands of his biggest fans for breach of copyright, provoking an angry backlash and claims of censorship.

His lawyers have forced his three biggest internet fansites to remove all photographs, images, lyrics, album covers and anything linked to the artist's likeness. A legal letter asks the fansites to provide "substantive details of the means by which you propose to compensate our clients [Paisley Park Entertainment Group, NPG Records and AEG] for damages". The singer himself is believed to take a close interest in unofficial use of his image and music, monitoring websites from his sprawling Paisley Park studio complex in Minneapolis.

A coalition named Prince Fans United, representing Housequake.com, Princefans.com and Prince.org, has been formed by the website organisers to fight back. They said they would contest the action on the basis that it was an attempt "to stifle all critical commentary about Prince". They added that the "cease and desist" notices went as far as calling for the removal of pictures taken by fans of their Prince tattoos and their vehicles carrying Prince-inspired licence plates.

"It's a really short-sighted and futile move," said Nicola Slade, editor of the industry newsletter Record of the Day. "Prince has got a lot of fans and as he's decided to take a more leftfield approach to releasing his material, he should be nurturing the relationship. I'm shocked, really."

The singer had been considered to be in the vanguard of efforts by some artists to cut record labels out of the equation and forge their own relationships with fans through the web and live concerts, having been one of the first to sell music directly to fans via his website.

He recently completed a 21-night residency at London's O2 arena, effortlessly mixing up the setlist each night to draw on a rich back catalogue that includes Purple Rain, Raspberry Beret, Kiss and Sign o' the Times, and was lauded for a genius marketing move in giving away his CD to concertgoers and with copies of the Mail on Sunday.

Alex Burmaster, an analyst at Nielsen Online, said: "It's a paradox that a musician who has done so much to bring himself closer to his fans, particularly with his 'them and us' crusade against the record labels, should be engaging in a course of action that effectively removes the raison d'etre of fansites.

"But it's the mark of the man who always goes against the grain that he should be doing this at a time when other artists and their labels are suddenly embracing the social media phenomenon."

In 1993, amid a bitter dispute with the record label, Prince changed his name to an unpronounceable "love symbol" as a step towards his "ultimate goal of emancipation from the chains" that he said tied him to Warner Bros.

Yesterday's move follows an earlier declaration of war on copyrighted material hosted by web giants such as YouTube and eBay.

In September, he appointed the internet company Web Sheriff to police the removal of up to 2,000 clips from YouTube. Web Sheriff managing director, John Giacobbi, said at the time that the singer wanted "to create a template for other artists". "Prince doesn't really want to go around suing people - he'd much rather people just respected his rights. He will be victorious," he said.

Controversy followed this decision, too, when a mother from Pennsylvania posted a clip of her baby dancing to his 1984 hit Let's Go Crazy and Prince's lawyers demanded it was taken down.

Lawyers at the Electronic Frontier Foundation have vowed to contest the claim on her behalf, saying the song is hardly audible and constitutes fair use.

By going after the Google-owned YouTube, Prince was merely following the lead of a handful of other big rights owners - including MTV-owner Viacom, the estate of Elvis Presley and the Premier League - that believe the video sharing site makes advertising revenue off the back of their copyrighted content. But while some artists have resorted to the law in an attempt to persuade websites or internet providers to remove pirated songs and there have been disputes over lyrics, most decided long ago that it was counterproductive to attempt to get fans to remove images and album covers.

"You can get things taken down, the legal tools are there to do it," said Caroline Kean, a partner at the law firm Wiggin. "The reason people don't is partly practical, because there are so many images, but also due to the bad publicity you get from going after your biggest fans. Most people soon realised it was counter-productive."

A spokeswoman for the fans' campaign said the sites had always tried to work with Prince's management. But it appeared that Prince wanted to edit his past and there was "no sign" of his lawyers backing down, she said. "He's trying to control the internet 100% and you can't do that without infringing people's freedom of speech," she added.

There Is A Picture On The Front Page Of Prince From SuperBowl, I Wonder If They Asked Him To Use It?

OK, question! i thought Prince knew and aprroved or even created the above mentioned websites. Did Prince approve and/or create the the above mentioned sites? Some of the things said compared to what has existed so long is confusing. Did Prince orignate the above sites or not? Because i understand, Prince being upset over misuse of his image and music. i just wanted to clear up the abpve question.
[Edited 11/6/07 16:44pm]

ReginaCarman said:

No, the sites were not in any way officially connected with Prince.

All I would like to contribute to this evenings talk, is, that bad mouthing Prince has never been a new thing...It has been the man's ball and chain, since he decided to share himself and his musicianship...

The strong circle of intelligent minds, will ignore the superficial comments, and respect Prince, through all of these showered comments....that fail to fall on Prince and drech him with, personal boo-hoo's...

If Prince wanted to, he could hang us all out to dry....

Tame said:

Yes, but one reason his records sold less and less, and also the biggest reason for the general distaste for Prince over the years has been badmouthing by the public and press, the main starting point being the backlash after "We are the World" stuff went down. Ever since then anything negative about Prince sticks in the public minds, and has of course cause him less commercial power and reputation. That translates into non interest in his work from large target markets. He has to then be very wiley (as he always is) to continue making the money to support himself. And most certainly he is a great businessman at making money these days with the touring and appearances.

SquirrelMeat said:

Thank u for the info, can u tell me why he has allowed them to exist for this long?

ReginaCarman said:

So we are pimped to buy his albums after Chaos & Disorder.
[Edited 11/6/07 18:22pm]

ReginaCarman said:

They're fan made sites... they are not official Prince sites. It's not up to Prince to allow them to exist or not.

Shit, better remove my symbol tattoo.... and get rid of my ECNIRP and NPG license plates...

ufoclub said:

And during ALL the times when Prince was experiencing all that type of self-inflicted general distaste by the public and press who were the people still buying his music, going to his shows, watching his videos, forming fan clubs, newsletters, fanzines, websites, keeping a connection between him the only people who cared about his work? The very same people he's pulling this copyright crap on today! His fans! It's a crying shame!

pr1nce said:

send him the bill it is his image

SexyBeautifulOne said:

^^^ Yup what she said...^^^

I don't think I'll be able to defend him to everyone who is now going to mercilessly take the piss now. There's nothing I can say to make his actions sound like the work of a sane man...

This all leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I've been singing Prince's praises for 19 years. Bought everyone of his CD's, attended all of his concerts I could afford and it's all been a positive experience. I can understand wanting to control your image etc. But to say that because you aren't profiting from the unoffical use of your image of FAN sites is ridiculous. WE are the people that bought tickets and went to see him and share this with people and make them want to go as well surely that means we HAVE paid for the use of this stuff and the right to discuss the experience with friends. Why doesn't he walk around covering his face like he did when WB owned his image?
I really would like some knid of explanation to all this. At the end of the day I'd now seriously consider not going to see him as I would feel very false in being fed an act of 'I love you guys' when it's becoming a very mixed message. Do you think he will make a statment to clear things up as at the moment I'm confused!

Tame said:

i have been a fan since the 70's
i tell you i will never buy another prince item again and will never attend to see him live again unless he backs down
i have no respect for him anymore. none
[Edited 11/7/07 2:56am]

ladymisskat said:

I'm with you - I think that he should make an official statement and explain this latest chapter of bullshit that he's raining down on us... but I very much doubt it will happen..

They say there's a fine line between genius and madness and i fear that if this legal wrangle is really initiated by Prince and not his lawyers, then he may have finally crossed the line into insanity. I've been a major fan for over 25 years and always defended him through the thick and thin of his carreer, but this time I can find no defense for these self-destructive actions. As far as I can see, no-one will benefit from the innevitable outcome of this situation.
Having been on a major high after seeing him three times at the 02 in the summer, I couldn't feel any more despondant about what he's doing now.

MrsGoodnight said:

Right now he's hiding behind a whole bunch of legal language crap... I don't think he'll make a statement, what would he say?!?
there's no way to make "I want to sue my fans" sound good!

The Guardian have helpfully created a Prince gallery on their site, with the following blurb:

Hey, Prince fans...

Enjoy looking at your favourite singer's colourful costumes, but don't want to get sued? Don't fret: Guardian Unlimited Music has put together a gallery of some of his best outfits for you to peruse without having to worry about a lawsuit.



The gallery is here: http://www.guardian.co.uk...=331185442

Ouch, that hurts !

I know they are being sarcastic but the truth is that these newspapers know that they are in their right to publish pictures of celebrities. Prince's lawyers know that they wouldn't stand a chance if they went after all the news sites that publish his image.

Instead they pick on gullible fans who are blinded by their own adoration, an easy group to tackle because of their financial weakness !

It's this truth that hurts the most - I've never been so disappointed in somebody like I am now in Prince...
[Edited 11/7/07 6:14am]

lspear76 said:

Well thank for the info, but it seems odd to me that he doesn't have the ultimate say on something that is about him. i think its only fair that a person has the right to decide how his/her own image and accomplishments are portrayed and used in the world. But, if what u say is true, than not all laws are fair.

ladymisskat said:

I warned U Kat, he's a right scallywag!

ReginaCarman said:

If you don't have the freedom to comment or report on people without their approval or rules, then you will be in a very backwards situation. It has to apply across the board.

For example, back in the day, in a serious case like Hitler, you can't say anything bad if it impedes his plans and ambitions?

Or even in a not so serious case like say, Lindsey Lohan allegedly causing a car chase through residential neighborhoods high on cocaine (with 6 or so witnesses) leading to her arrest. The three witnesses that were dragged along unwittingly with her in the car she hijacked should be able to tell their account without her approval... right?

Freedom has to apply across the board, or else the rules and wealth can turn into some serious abuse pf control. Prince, even though he is not a serious life or death issue, is still part of the modern world in which people have fought and died to maintain the freedom to speak what they believe and post photos or recordings of what they see and hear in the world around them.

It gets into a very detailed situation to maintain freedom yet still maintain commercial rights for individuals or companies. In these cases, it is debatable about whether Prince is suffering any commercial loss or slander.

I think a lot of people don't consider that the creators of the websites and posts are artists (someone expressing their thoughts through designed multi-mediums) and need their modes of expression protected.

drcoldchoke said:

Perception!

I'd imagine that if he'd done it before the 21 nights tour then he would have lost a great deal of fan revenue and publity from the forums. As most of us involved in the forums attended more than one night, and the core fans attended almost all of them, including some VIP trips, the figure he lost would have been substantial.

Many newspapers used the forums to gain access to fans reactions to the shows and to get information from a single, pre-collated resource. I think we were milked by the paparazzi on a number of occasions (the glow stick idea for example), but in doing so we allowed Prince to be featured in articles in UK publications on a daily basis, raising the profile of the tour and gaining him increased ticket sales.
[Edited 11/8/07 5:01am]

1978 - 2007 Prince, the musician

2007 onwards Prince, the dictator

You know what they say about little men, Hitler was a little man.

they forgot to mention that prince shut down his own "official" fan site immediately after winning an award for it