This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.
New topic 
Printable SCNDLS said: sj1600 said: This thread seems to be divided into two.
One half pointing out that legally he has every right to control a video of his own creation - legally I have no doubt that he has the right to pull it from Jill's site. The other half just basically saying that he's being a cock for making this stand. What he is doing may well be legal but I question why he feel the need to follow his legal right to every minutae of his creation. Is this because he feel that if he lets the little stuff go everyone will walk over him? Treating Jill in this fashion is small and petty, imo. Can he do what he is doing? Obviously. Should he be doing this? He does not own the video we are discussing because he did not "create" it. She performed the song on a TV show, therefore, the TV show, channel, and/or producers own that video. Not Prince even if the song is his. Jill maybe violating the show's copyright but I don't see how Prince can demand the video be taken down. My point earlier is that he must have given some sort of consent in the first place for Jill to even appear on the show. So how does this violate P's rights??? That's been my question all along.  Not only that, but wouldn't it mean that Sinead could never post a video for Nothing Compares 2 U, the Bangles could never post a video for Manic Monday, and Sheena Easton could never post a video for Sugar Walls? Wouldn't it set a precedent within the music industry? Someone who wrote a song for, say, Whitney Houston or Janet Jackson, could demand they take their videos down. I don't believe what he is doing is legal at all; I think he just has more money so he can push people around. He needs to realize that he gave those songs away; they aren't his anymore. [Edited 2/26/08 9:55am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
-- [Edited 2/26/08 9:57am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Efan said: SCNDLS said: He does not own the video we are discussing because he did not "create" it. She performed the song on a TV show, therefore, the TV show, channel, and/or producers own that video. Not Prince even if the song is his. Jill maybe violating the show's copyright but I don't see how Prince can demand the video be taken down. My point earlier is that he must have given some sort of consent in the first place for Jill to even appear on the show. So how does this violate P's rights??? That's been my question all along. Not only that, but wouldn't it mean that Sinead could never post a video for Nothing Compares 2 U, the Bangles could never post a video for Manic Monday, and Sheena Easton could never post a video for Sugar Walls? Wouldn't it set a precedent within the music industry? Someone who wrote a song for, say, Whitney Houston or Janet Jackson, could demand they take their videos down. I don't believe what he is doing is legal at all; I think he just has more money so he can push people around. He needs to realize that he gave those songs away; they aren't his anymore. [Edited 2/26/08 9:55am] This is exactly what I'm saying. With this rationale where does it end???? He don't own everythang he's ever touched or breathed on. Just cuz my dog (named Prince btw  ) pees on tha corner don't mean I can claim that property as solely ours. [Edited 2/26/08 10:00am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: Efan said: Not only that, but wouldn't it mean that Sinead could never post a video for Nothing Compares 2 U, the Bangles could never post a video for Manic Monday, and Sheena Easton could never post a video for Sugar Walls? Wouldn't it set a precedent within the music industry? Someone who wrote a song for, say, Whitney Houston or Janet Jackson, could demand they take their videos down. I don't believe what he is doing is legal at all; I think he just has more money so he can push people around. He needs to realize that he gave those songs away; they aren't his anymore. [Edited 2/26/08 9:55am] This is exactly what I'm saying. With this rationale where does it end???? He don't own everythang he's ever touched or breathed on. Just cuz my dog (named Prince btw ) pees on tha corner don't mean I can claim that property as solely ours.
[Edited 2/26/08 10:00am] I wish he would pee on Trevor..... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: SCNDLS said: This is exactly what I'm saying. With this rationale where does it end???? He don't own everythang he's ever touched or breathed on. Just cuz my dog (named Prince btw ) pees on tha corner don't mean I can claim that property as solely ours.
[Edited 2/26/08 10:00am] I wish he would pee on Trevor..... What makes you think he hasn't???? That would be the only explanation for his pissy disposition. LOL!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Efan said: Not only that, but wouldn't it mean that Sinead could never post a video for Nothing Compares 2 U, the Bangles could never post a video for Manic Monday, and Sheena Easton could never post a video for Sugar Walls? Wouldn't it set a precedent within the music industry? Someone who wrote a song for, say, Whitney Houston or Janet Jackson, could demand they take their videos down. I don't believe what he is doing is legal at all; I think he just has more money so he can push people around. He needs to realize that he gave those songs away; they aren't his anymore.
[Edited 2/26/08 9:55am] At this point, I think P is just bullying Youtube and e'ry body else because he can. Youtube don't want no trouble and are scared of being sued so they are taking down EVERY thing regardless of whether P's request has any merit or legal basis. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
laurarichardson said: Yes, I am sure he was putting a gun to Jill's head. She was an adult and she made a bad choice hanging around him along as she did and she has to live with it.
By this same argument, Prince does not deserve control of his WB masters and he should have stayed with WB and honored his contract by playing the game along with them. He was an adult when he made the decision to sign away those rights; no one held a gun to his head. He has to live with his bad decisions. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: At this point, I think P is just bullying Youtube and e'ry body else because he can. Youtube don't want no trouble and are scared of being sued so they are taking down EVERY thing regardless of whether P's request has any merit or legal basis.
True. There are many facets of the copyright law that need to be dealt with and cleared up now, and I would support him if he were actually attempting to set new legal standards for artists rights in this age. But he's not. It seems motivated by selfishness and brattiness, it's not grounded by the law, and it's hypocritical. He's just running roughshod over people and counting on the fact that they won't have the resources to stand up to him. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Okay...ENUFF ENUFF!!! Prince, this has gotten way out of hand. I 4 one am sick and tired of this and so are your fans and now even the people u worked with. Okay, U wanna stop your music from being downloaded illegally...okay I get that. U wanna stop your videos from youtube...okay I get that...U wanna stop your pictures on Housequake and the Org...okay, somewhat I got that. U wanna stop your "former" artists from getting noticed...okay, what the hell! Come on man, what have u done for them since "U" left them 2 fend 4 themselves? Nothing. If I recall, U left her 2 finish the rest of her project on her own while u worked with others. True, U written the song but do that make u "own" the video? If the Bangles posted their "maniac Monday" video, would U stop it? If Shenna Easton did "Sugar Walls", would U stop it? Stop acting like a spoiled ass brat and grow the fu*k up! She's doing this on Myspace for her fans who is on her friend's list (and I am one of them). The key word is "MYSPACE" not "PRINCESPACE". | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: Graycap23 said: I wish he would pee on Trevor..... What makes you think he hasn't???? That would be the only explanation for his pissy disposition. LOL!!! I know that's right..... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: SCNDLS said: What makes you think he hasn't???? That would be the only explanation for his pissy disposition. LOL!!! I know that's right..... I just realized you may have meant that you wish my doggie Princey poo would pee on Trevor. He's too well-mannered for that, and frankly wouldn't waste his time.  So of course the "he" I was referring to was Prince, his boss. LOL! Just wanted to clear that up. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: Graycap23 said: I know that's right..... I just realized you may have meant that you wish my doggie Princey poo would pee on Trevor. He's too well-mannered for that, and frankly wouldn't waste his time. So of course the "he" I was referring to was Prince, his boss. LOL! Just wanted to clear that up. I got cha.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said: I sense an onslaught a comin'!
Van Hunt v.2 "Ungrateful b***h!" "He" wrote the songs, "He" can do what he wants with them, blah, blah blah. Maybe not here, but they are in her blog
I may get alot of negative feedback on my reply to this, but its all about freedom of speech.
Jill, I adore you and your music, but you gotta look at it this way. It isn't "Prince" personally reading through myspace blogs and scanning youtube or myspace for his videos. He's a very busy man and I'm sure he wouldn't attack you. I don't know him personally, you know him better than all of us, bcause of your work with The Man! If he co-wrote and/or co-produced the single with you, then of course you should be entitled to keep your rights, if he wrote and produced the entire song, then its his! We all know Prince is known as a control freak in the business for many years, so can we just move along and let him do his thing as he's alway have. I'm sure your greatful to him for what he's contributed to your career. He definitely introduced you to me and all of my friends, I don't think I would even know who you are if it wasn't for Prince, so let the past be the past and post new videos without Prince's contribution, because after all if your productive in your own career, then place the focus on your latest work and ditch Prince, since he's such a egotistical jerk in your eyes, you shouldn't want nothing to do with him, yet you point fingers at him for this, but still showing videos that you know associates yourself with The Man. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RipHer2Shreds said: BlaqueKnight said: I sense an onslaught a comin'!
Van Hunt v.2 "Ungrateful b***h!" "He" wrote the songs, "He" can do what he wants with them, blah, blah blah. Maybe not here, but they are in her blog
I may get alot of negative feedback on my reply to this, but its all about freedom of speech.
Jill, I adore you and your music, but you gotta look at it this way. It isn't "Prince" personally reading through myspace blogs and scanning youtube or myspace for his videos. He's a very busy man and I'm sure he wouldn't attack you. I don't know him personally, you know him better than all of us, bcause of your work with The Man! If he co-wrote and/or co-produced the single with you, then of course you should be entitled to keep your rights, if he wrote and produced the entire song, then its his! We all know Prince is known as a control freak in the business for many years, so can we just move along and let him do his thing as he's alway have. I'm sure your greatful to him for what he's contributed to your career. He definitely introduced you to me and all of my friends, I don't think I would even know who you are if it wasn't for Prince, so let the past be the past and post new videos without Prince's contribution, because after all if your productive in your own career, then place the focus on your latest work and ditch Prince, since he's such a egotistical jerk in your eyes, you shouldn't want nothing to do with him, yet you point fingers at him for this, but still showing videos that you know associates yourself with The Man. The spelling and grammar in that other person's post show the level of thinking he or she is capable of. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
It sounds like Jill Jones is a slave to Paisley Park. Free the masters and give them to Jill. She's singing on them. Does anyone know if she co-wrote them? Jill should sue to void any contract he has preventing her from using her own music and videos. Prince is a hypocrite. and he acts like a jerk too often.
http://www.neosoul.com NeoSoul.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well i totally understand Jill's point, but PRINCE doesnt own this stuff. I think we might be really shocked at just what PRINCE owns and doesnt own. "We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RipHer2Shreds said:[quote]Maybe not here, but they are in her blog
I may get alot of negative feedback on my reply to this, but its all about freedom of speech.
Jill, I adore you and your music, but you gotta look at it this way....The Man!... First of all, let me say that I can't respect anyone who refers to anybody other than their deity or someone of similar standing as "The Man". That wreaks of fanbotism and idolworship and you know from that point on, its time to stop reading that person's post. Obviously, this person was trying to take Prince's side and, in a polite way tell Jill to shut up and put up with whatever Prince does because she owes her career to him. Jill's voice is all up and down Prince's records as well as his protogeés but you don't hear her yelling "take my vocals off all of your records" because she, like most artists, understand that part of music is sharing. The person that posted that went on to further absolve Prince of any blame by saying [paraphrase]"He's too damn busy to be cruising the web taking down videos or worrying about your ass"[/paraphrase]. Again, there's always an NPG Cultist ready to rescue Prince from any wrongs or blame. Web Sheriff is MOST LIKELY working from a list. A list given to them by who? Charles Manson never killed anybody. Does that absolve him of wrongdoing? By some peoples' logic, it does. Poor Jill. [Edited 2/26/08 14:02pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
As Stevie said "what the fuss". What Prince is doing is no different from let's say what George Lucas does. He controls his Star Wars empire with an iron fist. There is no way in hell anybody would be able to download star wars for free or show a clip without him getting paid. When Lucas broke away from the movie system he was called a mavrick or a trendsetter, and nobody called him a greedy asshole when he rereleased his movies several times or when he shuts down an website that he does not have a say or control of.
But if Jill does own half the song then she should fight Prince on the use of the song, but we do not know what type of agreement they entered into,but if i know P he probably screwed her out of the rights to the song. But my main complaint is why does Prince get a bad rep from people for how he wants to control his work, but when people like Lucas or Spielberg control their works nobody complains. Maybe the reason why is that their work has made them over a billion dollars each so that entitles them to control their works however they want to, but since Prince music has never made him over a billions dollars he is not entitled to the same rights as them  why in God's name do u wanna make me cry | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
carlluv said: As Stevie said "what the fuss". What Prince is doing is no different from let's say what George Lucas does. He controls his Star Wars empire with an iron fist. There is no way in hell anybody would be able to download star wars for free or show a clip without him getting paid. When Lucas broke away from the movie system he was called a mavrick or a trendsetter, and nobody called him a greedy asshole when he rereleased his movies several times or when he shuts down an website that he does not have a say or control of.
But if Jill does own half the song then she should fight Prince on the use of the song, but we do not know what type of agreement they entered into,but if i know P he probably screwed her out of the rights to the song. But my main complaint is why does Prince get a bad rep from people for how he wants to control his work, but when people like Lucas or Spielberg control their works nobody complains. Maybe the reason why is that their work has made them over a billion dollars each so that entitles them to control their works however they want to, but since Prince music has never made him over a billions dollars he is not entitled to the same rights as them I agree with all of this BUT in this case Prince does not own this video. So what now? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said:[quote] RipHer2Shreds said: Maybe not here, but they are in her blog
I may get alot of negative feedback on my reply to this, but its all about freedom of speech.
Jill, I adore you and your music, but you gotta look at it this way....The Man!... First of all, let me say that I can't respect anyone who refers to anybody other than their deity or someone of similar standing as "The Man". That wreaks of fanbotism and idolworship and you know from that point on, its time to stop reading that person's post. Obviously, this person was trying to take Prince's side and, in a polite way tell Jill to shut up and put up with whatever Prince does because she owes her career to him. Jill's voice is all up and down Prince's records as well as his protogeés but you don't hear her yelling "take my vocals off all of your records" because she, like most artists, understand that part of music is sharing. The person that posted that went on to further absolve Prince of any blame by saying [paraphrase]"He's too damn busy to be cruising the web taking down videos or worrying about your ass"[/paraphrase]. Again, there's always an NPG Cultist ready to rescue Prince from any wrongs or blame. Web Sheriff is MOST LIKELY working from a list. A list given to them by who? Charles Manson never killed anybody. Does that absolve him of wrongdoing? By some peoples' logic, it does. Poor Jill. [Edited 2/26/08 14:02pm] In all fairness i still think PRINCE doesnt own anything in the long run, and there is a higher ownership going on, and this issue is going on in alot of places. Take 80's Group EXPOSE they are touring now with the original members under the name EXPOSE, but they are not allowed to play a new song or solo song under that name EXPOSE since the name is owned by their producer Lewis Martinee and his company, which is owned by a much bigger corporation which is owned by another corporation even bigger, so the issue is much more difficult than Prince is a prick, which may be true, but, i think we over estimate his OWNERSHIP. "We went where our music was appreciated, and that was everywhere but the USA, we knew we had fans, but there is only so much of the world you can play at once" Magne F | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
blackguitaristz said: SoulAlive said: In 1987,after many years of delays,Jill Jones' debut album was finally released on Paisley Park Records.The album didn't do very well and in 1988,Jill went into the studio with another producer and recorded an album's worth of demos.She was trying to define herself,musically,and probably didn't want to be known as "just another Prince girl".Unfortunately,Prince had other ideas.In 1990,he began preparing her second album.Songs recorded during this period include "My Baby Knows How To Love Me","Flesh and Blood" and "Boom Boom (Can't You Feel The Beat Of My Heart",which was planned as the first single.A video was shot,as well. Jill didn't like these new songs and she didn't like the direction that Prince was trying to take her in.The two were having alot of heated arguments and disagreements.The last straw came when Prince sent Jill the script for 'Graffiti Bridge'.He had promised her a bigger part but when she was reading the final script on a plane to Minneapolis,she angrily ripped it up,much to the surprise of the other passengers
By the end of 1990,it was evident that Prince and Jill had drifted apart.She wanted to move on and take her career forward but he wouldn't let her out of her contract.Thus,she was unable to sign a new record label and release new music for seven years.By 1995,she was singing backup for the disco band Chic.She probably feels that Prince sabotaged her career. Yeah, it's called control. Where Jill made her mistake was trusting in P that he would turn around and do her right. As well as Jill could sing and as FINE as Jill is. She's STIL fine! Take a look at any of the other women that was hooked to P, any of them...and then look at Jill. Anyway, there is no way in hell P shouldn't have gave Jill some killer material and put out an album by her in 84. Hell, in 83 is when her album should have came out. After 1999, but before P's and everybody else's albums were hitting in 84. She could have avoided the mass releasings. P had the material, that wasn't the issue. Even if Warners wanted to wait in 84 to capitalize on the film, still cool. Jill would have sold through the roof. Definately out selling Apples. Look at how P did Sheila with her first album? It was obvious that P gave a shit about Sheila and her album doing well. P knew what it was going to take for Sheila's album to blow up...Hit material. The Glam Life was a no brainer. Pure hit. And the album as a whole was good. And this from a woman who can't sing. Wasn't the case in Jill's department. At that time, Jill CLEARLY was the most talented singer in P's camp. And had the perfect image. She was very well known from the 1999 album video's. 1999, Automatic, u know. And her fantastic vocals on the 1999 album. besides P, she was the star of that album. No way in hell her album from 83, 84 wouldn't have been huge. The girl had the complete package: Great vocals, great looks and charisma to boot. Like P, she was perfect for the 80's. When Jill saw that P was holding out on her, timing wise , she should have bounced then. Went to a cat like Nile Rodgers who was hot as fuck as a producer in the 80's. He would have worked with her before u could say lemon cake. Thanks guys! Based on your replies, I have an idea for a new thread. Sure, the guy is a creative genius, but he doesn't seem to play nice with those around him all the time... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
[b]strange that google and live search still come up with the Jill jones links.
will they also being strapped. try it. maybe don't link it anymore but give the search key's | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
EverlastingNow said: PaisleyRose said: If it was/is HER video then no one could stop her from posting it, obviously it is a video with Jill in it, but it does NOT belong to her.
If I wrote and produced a play(and copyrighted it), then had a video made of the actors performing it, and I copyrighted the video...they could not post the video without my permission. They could not perform the play without my permission. A lot of people have been looking the other way when laws such as these have been broken, don't fault Prince because he's choosing to enforce his rights now, even if he chose not to before. If Jill shares the copyright with him, she may have a cause for legal action. If she does not....  My question is WHY does Prince care? If someone wants to watch the Mia Bocca video or any Paisley Park artist how does that take any money from him? Hardly any of those artists made any money any way, so if he is so about the music, seems like he'd want it heard in any fashion. To me it's all about his control issue. He's not going to be happy until the few hardcore fans that buy his albums get tired of being told how they can enjoy his music. Seems like his philosophy on Religion and the black and white stance he now takes on it has carried over to his music now, my way, or no way. That's really sad. Beside being a control freak from hell, Prince also wants to change HIS own music history! Everything is starting to make sense to me. Prince want to control our freedom of speech by threatening fan sites (including the org) and now Prince wants Jill Jones to act like he never did side projects with her at all. So what next Prince: 1, You're going to threaten Denise Matthews (Vanity) with a lawsuit for talking about you in her own autobiography? 2. Tell Morris Day that he can't perform any more live versions of The Time's greatest funk hits anymore because he knows that you were Jamie Starr? 3. Tell Paul Peterson & Susannah Melvoin that they can't show the video for (let alone perform a new version of) The Screams Of Passion because you don't want to hear it anymore? 4. You're going to threaten Mayte with a lawsuit because she still remember the time that she used to be YOUR wife? Everyone in the org can laugh at me now if you want to. But at this point, Prince has lost so much of his damn mind that I wouldn't put him past him of doing something so stupid as what I just listed.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
could i rent a webb sherrif.
and scare all the Micheal Jackson fans of with this kind of messages. would be fun. just say that there copyrights involved. what would the fans say??? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: carlluv said: As Stevie said "what the fuss". What Prince is doing is no different from let's say what George Lucas does. He controls his Star Wars empire with an iron fist. There is no way in hell anybody would be able to download star wars for free or show a clip without him getting paid. When Lucas broke away from the movie system he was called a mavrick or a trendsetter, and nobody called him a greedy asshole when he rereleased his movies several times or when he shuts down an website that he does not have a say or control of.
But if Jill does own half the song then she should fight Prince on the use of the song, but we do not know what type of agreement they entered into,but if i know P he probably screwed her out of the rights to the song. But my main complaint is why does Prince get a bad rep from people for how he wants to control his work, but when people like Lucas or Spielberg control their works nobody complains. Maybe the reason why is that their work has made them over a billion dollars each so that entitles them to control their works however they want to, but since Prince music has never made him over a billions dollars he is not entitled to the same rights as them I agree with all of this BUT in this case Prince does not own this video. So what now? As i stated earlier if she owns half the song then she should fight Prince over the right to show the video,but if she doesn't she has no right to complain,cuz if he owns the song then she would have to ask his permission for use of that song regradless if it's a performance video it's still his music, remember when paul and yoko were mad that Nike was using a beatles song in their commerical, even through paul and john wrote the song, they had no ownership to it. since mj owned the rights to all of their songs he could do whatever he wanted. they might have been pissed about it, but there was nothing they could do. they had no ownership of their music. why in God's name do u wanna make me cry | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
carlluv said: As Stevie said "what the fuss". What Prince is doing is no different from let's say what George Lucas does. He controls his Star Wars empire with an iron fist. There is no way in hell anybody would be able to download star wars for free or show a clip without him getting paid. When Lucas broke away from the movie system he was called a mavrick or a trendsetter, and nobody called him a greedy asshole when he rereleased his movies several times or when he shuts down an website that he does not have a say or control of.
But if Jill does own half the song then she should fight Prince on the use of the song, but we do not know what type of agreement they entered into,but if i know P he probably screwed her out of the rights to the song. But my main complaint is why does Prince get a bad rep from people for how he wants to control his work, but when people like Lucas or Spielberg control their works nobody complains. Maybe the reason why is that their work has made them over a billion dollars each so that entitles them to control their works however they want to, but since Prince music has never made him over a billions dollars he is not entitled to the same rights as them Are you serious? George Lucas is the laughing stock/poster boy for craziness in the film industry. He is HATED by most of the industry but his business is huge so people still do business with him. His demeanor for being a kook is so well known that MadTV actually did a skit about his crazy ass. You really pulled that "nobody complains" out of thin air with regards to Lucas. That's simply NOT TRUE. Lots of people complain about his obsessive behavior. Perhaps you were unaware of it, somehow. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Prince is about to turn 50 and must be going through a mid-life crisis, so he needs the ultimate control.
Check out ascap.com, insert Prince and see all the songs he is credited as writing. The songs on Jill Jones album are solely credited to Prince as the writer and Jill Jones as the performer. She should have demanded credit back in 1987, even if she added one line (four words). Even Dez Dickerson (Desmond) has credit for co-writing "Cool" with Prince and that was in 1981! By the way, Prince has less than 700 songs on the ASCAP credit chart, which gives people with "special merchandise" not on the Prince credit list the perfect opportunity to write it, publish it, and claim credit as an ASCAP member. That will really F@$K UP Prince's ego.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
People, you have to remember that Mia Bocca was written back in 1982/83 and was used in Cherry Moon in 1985. Jill didn't put out the song until 1987. The song is souly Prince's along with G-Spot, All Day All Night and the rest of the album. Jill made no contributions to the album but to sing over Prince's existing tracks, so in essence their his songs to how he pleases.
Do I think what he's doing is fair? No. He should be happy that people still take an interest in him. He just wants to take his past, hide it and make it look like it never existed. Prince needs to recognize that he can't change who he was/is. He just needs to say "Yeah, thats what I did back then, but this is who I am now" and he'll be just fine if he's so worried about getting into Heaven. __________________________________________________
2 words falling between the drops and the moans of his condition | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The botton line is folks, like i stated earlier like Lucas and Spielberg or anyone else who owns their works. If they can't make any money off of it,then they will make it hard for anyone to have acess to it. Prince is no different from the rest of them. it's not about him being ashamed of his past if he can't make any money of it, then it's bye bye video or anything else, why in God's name do u wanna make me cry | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This is an uniformed opinion as I don't know much about the history behind P & Jill's collaboration[s], but to sum up, the way I see it is that the whole issue boils down to who is the lawful copyright holder of the song/material in question, as Wonder505 said. I totally support his/her point, as well as Prince seeking to protect his IP rights in the cases where he is the lawful owner.
Also, as has been mentioned here, I feel we don't know all the details of the contract[s] between Jill and Prince, and I suspect copyright laws are more complicated than we think. In any case, I don't think IP law [or any other legislation for that matter] should be applied selectively [depending on whether the aggrieved party is a former collaborator/friend, etc.]. This is not Russia!  .. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
New topic Printable This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.