'Of course' I can't reply to the original Prince Fans United - March 2008 Update thread so I'm posting here.
Now that the Irish concert thingie is over we can concentrate on the problem that mr Prince has had for at least the past 10 years.
So what is the status?
Who can really tell?
And why is it like it is?

(no, no criticism yet, just questions from an interested person)

Aww, Prince shmince! Just sit back and watch the fun in September when his new book and cd are released to the lowest sales in publishing history!

The book will be filled with nice photos.
The CD will be a `bad` selection of the songs.

(yes, about 13 or so aftershows of more than one hour in average and he releases just one cd!? half a year late? so there will be important songs and moments missing, no doubt. Via other channels already more complete renderings were made available months ago. I won't comment on the overdubs until I have checked the CD; yes I *will* buy it!)

I believe Gavin is the source for information/updates. You send him a PM over at Housequake.

luv4u said:

If you're meaning that specific Gavin, I won't contact him since he's not my friend, to put it kindly.

If he's the contact (just spokesperson or more?) for PFU updates let's see waht he makes of this...

udo said:

udo said:

Probably the same thing as I do - that you're a whining guy who demands updates about something he's not involved in or making an effort to support it.

Teacher said:

This says exactly that you don't understand what I mean.
It also says more about you than about the topic because you start judging me.

I mean to say that you totally miss the point.

My point being that what currently goes on is way too slow, too much behind closed doors, too vague and too much based on what Prince's lawyers think is real without getting to a real court case. (didn't you notice stuff has slowed down again until the next moment he'll think 'action' is needed? where are the recent press releases about actions against violators?)

When they would go to court (what I mean and perhaps want, depending on the exact subject) it would be a much quicker, cleaner process; public and for all to see. It would perhaps even be fair, especially when the court case would not be in the USA.

So yes, I say it is slow, that nothing is happening and that it is bad.
So I whine. But you miss the point.

Is this the right forum?

rasplicious said:

Most certainly.
I mean: No moderators commented or moved the thread elsewhere.
The previous thread was also here.
And it's all about the slow updates, slow progress, apathy, US legal system and ways of doing legal business over there.

Do you have any updates?

Yes, let's be sure to share the updates for Prince's team, too, as they would likely read this closer than anyone else...

udo said:

You are missing MY point - that it's none of your ghat damned business what goes on! You're not being sued and you're not Prince so it's nothing to do with you. That's why you can't make any demands to know what's going on, it simply doesn't concern you. You might think that you should be allowed to know what's happening but I don't understand WHY you would think that - you don't own any of the sites involved, you're just the average joe. And while it may come as a surprise to you, all of the people who are being threatened with lawsuits have lives that don't have anything to do with the internet - lives with things like work, family, friends. Honestly I think that takes up more of their time and thoughts than anything that Prince is threatening to do.

Teacher said:

Sure, start cursing in whatever spelling you choose. Please note that I did not use any type of that language yet.
Not my business? Says who? You don't `get` the injustice that mr Prince tries to press onto us. My freedoms are being the point here, even though I am not directly being sued or suing. Didn't you see this, yet?

I don't make demands. I say it is slow, beyond expectation bad (yes, I know the story for the greater part) and more than typically Prince and maybe even like some US multinational's lawmaking policy in a bad way. Yes, but don't take that personally.

Lives? Why then spend time here? Or care about here to post about the trouble you encounter?
Either deal with it or put up with it, don't do something in between as you now try to argue. Does this also explain why you spend energy on this thread? You are discussing a non issue. What is my opinion to you?

It appears that you need to review my postings and the idea behind them for a while. Maybe then you can see why I am critical about this situation. Maybe you can also consider the fact that Dutch is not your first language so my English might suffer a bit here and there.

udo said:

Obviously you and I see this differently - you feel that Prince is actually able to subject you to "injustice" or limit your freedom, while I think the whole notion is ridiculous. Prince can't do SHIT to me, or limit my freedom in any way, shape or form. Any person with even a resemblance of wit left (including Prince, which is obviously why he keeps quiet) can see that he won't be able to do anything to the people/websites he's threatened either so the whole thing is really nothing to be up in arms about. I have re-read your posts a number of times but I still can't see you having the right to get pissy when you don't get the answers, and you HAVE been pissy about it. Making comments about Gavin probably doesn't make him, or anybody else directly involved, more inclined to indulge you.

Lawmaking policy? I really don't understand that paragraph at all and maybe that's because you're Dutch but English isn't my first language either, I think it's a dig at Americans though in which case you fell a whole Atlantic short. I'm Swedish I can say that it's Prince's business to bring on the action though, "innocent till proven guilty" goes in all truly democratic countries and that means the burden of proof is on the plaintiff (Prince). Unless he brings the lawsuits into action nothing actually has happened cos no sites have been sued, yet. Therefore, if Prince does nothing neither will the owners of the sites concerned, that's my guess at least.

I'm not talking about MY life silly, I'm talking about the people who own this and other sites. I have a life too, surprisingly, but I take the time to post when I feel like it. The reason I spend time arguing with you is that I think you're wrong, obviously, and that you're asking things you have no business knowing if nobody wants to tell you. I guess Prince has a life too, since he's not saying anything either.

Teacher said:

Indeed.


Didn't you notice he already IS having effect on websites etc?
Why can't we post certain pictures, sub-optimal quality youtube stuff, discuss b**tlegs/recordings (_without_ even trading/selling), etc?
Yes, some people (e.g. webiste operators) are avoiding the hassle they might get into. I am not criticising them but the situation itself is not a nice one.


He won't sue for the real case but does sue for the smaller stuff (e.g. the LGC dancing toddler video?)
He did engage in the talks that are subject of this thread to try to negatiate some stuff. It appears he stopped doing that. So what is the consensus?


Sure. And I explain why. Even in this reply.


I think I explained my 'relation' with Gav and remained quite civil. Didn't I?


You appear to allow people/corporations etc to put pressure on you to change `the rules` although the rules are piossibly stricter than the actual law.
This could mean eroding freedoms.


P did scream his rights here and there. Bodyguards snatching up cameras, threatening websites about content, accusations of trading illegal materials, etc.


Yes, sure, but this doesn't clear up the air.
P will not stop threatening people when he sees fit (every now and then).
Even though his claims may fail in court people might feel intimidated and change their behaviour/actions.


I am not wrong. Your and my freedoms are at stake.
The progress or lack thereof of the `negotiations` is very related to what might happen in the future.
I hope you can understand that idea, even though you don't agree.

Udo

Udo, Prince has not sued anyone. The case with the dancing baby, it was the mother who made the the move to sue him and Universal.

Prince's effect on websites doesn't limit my freedom in the least. As far as I've seen the only things to be removed from websites are things that definitely or possibly were breaching copyright law. I don't see a problem in that.

Threatening to sue isn't the same as sueing

Prince's bodyguards are hardly the first to have snatched cameras

Screaming wolf doesn't mean there's actually a wolf coming

Whether or not you're right is obviously subjective.

Teacher said:

Over here we can't post certain pictures, discuss b**tlegs (NOT trade them), etc.
All very legal as far as I know.
So my freedom is being limited.


Copyright? That's to be discussed. Not in detailled cases but in general terms.


Shrug? The effect is largely the same.
It's a `soft` form of terror. Just like the **AA's are imposing on US citizens for alleged file-sharing.


That doesn't make their behaviour less wrong.
For a person used to preaching now and then it's even making him more wrong.


But uncritically ignoring the screaming doesn't help; meanwhile reality is influenced in a negative way by the wolf while he is ignored.


Not entirely true.
The freedoms thing can be objectively monitored.
If it's legal yet verboten on a website it counts.
[Edited 7/10/08 23:06pm]

No it doesn't count because who owns a web site decides what goes or doesn't on that site, regardless of legality issues - of course by that I mean that if I decide not to allow material that is legal, it's up to me. I do NOT mean that posting ILLEGAL material is ok even if it's ok by the site owner. Now, unless you're an attorney I can't really see you knowing all ins and outs of copyright legislation, so you can't possibly know if the pictures mentioned breaches that or not. Deciding not to allow the posting of pics that might breach the law is, I think, more because site owners are concerned with legal issues and less to do with Prince's actual threat. There is nothing stopping you from finding those pics in their original context and saving them onto your computer, if you're not concerned with legal issues that is. As for bootlegs (the only possible reason for you not spelling the word out is that you're paranoid about search engines finding it, which is hilarious) they are undoubtedly illegal. I actually can see how only the discussing of them would interest people in getting them if they don't, which might spark an inquiry as to where to get it, and presto it's soliciting for bootlegs. If I say "the version of 'blabla' that's on 'thisbootleg' kicks ASS, it's the best ever", it's to be expected that somebody who hasn't heard it wants it and that person might orgnote me or might post on the thread, that can be construed as the Org facilitating the spreading of boots.
I might not agree with that interpretation of the laws or the laws themselves but I suspect I'd feel different if I was a creative artist working for a living. I hope you realise that there is nothing the PFU sites CAN do at this point because they're not countersueing. I don't think you have realised this though.
Lastly, and I realise now that I've been wanting to say this all along but I couldn't put my finger on it: Udo, if you have such great problems with the lack of actions on the parts of the owners of the PFU sites, then create your own and allow the things that are not allowed on those. When Prince threatens to sue you, countersue and drag his ass to court.
If you can't do it yourself, then leave it alone.

Teacher said:

Oh. You say so. I think it is just to avoid the legal hassle although it is mostly legal. (depending on jurisdiction, etc)


What does my expertise have to do with it?
If I am doing something wrong (w.r.t. copyright or otherwise) I will soon find out that it's wrong if it is wrong.
There's also something like common sense that can help here.


A public space, a public person. Even more public than you would have been in that public space. Normally you can photograph all of the street for your personal use, except when mr Prince walks by?
Same for pictures of calendars, news items, books, album covers, bootlegs...


Yes, they both (artist versus fan) both have rights but the rights don't change when you are an artist.


So Prince will still bully them once in a while.


I very well know there is no suit. If there was stuff would have been settled (I mean, the case would have been ruled upon in that jurisdiction) by now.


No need for it. Just sue and you will get attention.
Point is: I am alone and have not yet enough legal experience to do the case pro se.
PFU could have mobilised fans, raised some cash, taken action. They have some advantages which they don't (even try to) use.


Prince threatens only the easy targets. And when nothing happens that situation continues to exist. That is at least one reason to write about.
Leaving it alone is not an option. Leaving something alone is what everyone does. They call that apathy in certain cases.