ALANL said:

. . . BTW the ownership of many Paisley Park Records projects originally issued through Warner Brothers eventually reverted to Prince. As I'm sure you and most fans realize, Prince has chosen not to make available any of the records originally issued on Paisley Park including The Family, Madhouse and Sheila E. He has also refused to cooperate with any proper remastering or further re-compiling of any of his Warner recordings.

...

On a different topic, could this be the reason why we have seen remastered versions of Dirty Mind, Controversy, 1999, and Purple Rain on vinyl, but not the albums issued on the Paisley Park label? See here:

http://prince.org/msg/7/357631

ALANL said:

Militant said:

Alan, I'm not sure who you were addressing (I guess a general post, but I haven't read every single post made on this forum on the matter) but I don't claim to be a lawyer, simply a music biz professional myself as an artist with a little more insight than many on here with regards to certain topics. Regarding your comments about second guessing and extolling wisdom, more than anything else as far my interest in this topic, both on this forum and in private conversations with Neil, I'm looking for specific answers to questions which haven't been addressed and areas that I have no problem stating that I know little about. I don't think anyone is out to "manufacture facts", but rather to gain a clearer understanding from multiple perspectives. And I would urge you to not be cynical about the choices you, Neil, or anyone may make to engage in conversation here regardless of any curiosity expressed by anyone.... I think the open nature of the platform is a greater freedom than any other.......

My, this forum is addicting, lol. Wasn;t addressing anyone specific. Not sure what questions have not been addressed but please respect that there may certain aspects of things that Neil is not at liberty to discuss publicly. You can be assured and Neil has stated clearly that any and all legal issues effecting fDeluxe are being professionally and properly addressed in the appropriate venues. No one here is the least bit intimidated by Prince or his attorneys, just understandably annoyed. BTW the ownership of many Paisley Park Records projects originally issued through Warner Brothers eventually reverted to Prince. As I'm sure you and most fans realize, Prince has chosen not to make available any of the records originally issued on Paisley Park including The Family, Madhouse and Sheila E. He has also refused to cooperate with any proper remastering or further re-compiling of any of his Warner recordings.

Nevertheless, please understand that while it makes for good gossip, as Neil has explained more fully, the use of the name THE FAMILY is no longer an issue. Neither Prince nor fDeluxe own rights to the name. It's a dead issue. There's nothing there to argue over even if any of them wanted to!

The issue is Prince and his attorneys continuing to annoy with threats based a false claim of ownership. He and his so-called management have refuted every attempt to discuss this and any other aspect in a civil manner on a level playing field.

If it were only so simple, these hollow threats could be laughed away.

However, not everyone in the industry has the interest or the time to research this stuff. Thus such threats addressed elsewhere could theoretically discourage record companies, booking agents, promoters, venue operators et.al. from doing business with fDeluxe for fear of legal exposure or even of alienating Prince, an artist they may also want to do business with. THAT is what is at stake - and is being dealt with properly in professional circles.

As for Prince's involvement in the band - he has none other than having written and produced their original album. In all these years he has never expressed any interest in exploiting or promoting The Family. His in-action strongly suggests it was a dead issue for him. UNTIL they reunited and announced a new recording. He has no authority over the band or their own music.

Furthermore, there are "right to work" laws that protect one's ability to earn a living doing what they do. Attempts to interfere cannot be tolerated.

I can't imagine anything plainer than that. So Neil is right. The conversation, with all due respect, should be over.

Thanks again Alan. I don't really have anything further to ask. But I will say that I do not believe Prince is a bully and just enjoys making peoples lives difficult for no reason. I believe he feels strongly about his perspective, regardless of the legality of the situation, and while it may not be easy to understand, he clearly feels he has reasons and with not knowing EXACTLY what they are, my choice is to respect them.

As I said to Neil before, I think ultimately all of this hullaballoo regarding names and rights and statements and documentation and all that is more hassle than it's worth. I think it's just best to move on, release the new record, not IGNORE the history per se, but simply acknowledge that "Fdeluxe" without any Prince involvement actually has very little in common with "The Family" other than being the same group of individuals. Which is true! All the people are talented in their own right and I am sure they've made an excellent album! So at this stage, better to just let it be out there on it's own.

People may feel that it's wrong, and not wish to tolerate perceived injustices from Prince's part... but I just feel ultimately it's all detracting from the music. I don't believe that either party is 100% right or 100% wrong, it's clearly more complex than that and we haven't, and probably won't ever hear how Prince feels and what his own motivations are.

^^ lmao

Why doesnt Prince pay people?

StonedImmaculate said:

Why doesnt Prince pay people?

He completely flipped out lately. He's going through trans4mations..

OzlemUcucu said:

StonedImmaculate said:

Why doesnt Prince pay people?

He completely flipped out lately. He's going through trans4mations..

I am sorry but this guy posting the band's business on this board is unprofessional. In addtion, at no point in time did he answer any of Militant's questions.

If the Family never had a finalized contract how they entitled to royalties? What does finalized contract mean. Either they had a contract or they did not. The band and their manager need to go to WB for royalty statements not Prince and his current mgmt and I am sure his current management would like to stop receiving phone calls about royalties that they know nothing about.

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

Spinlight said:

^^ lmao

I see your lmao and raise you a ROFLCOPTER!

babynoz said:

alexnvrmnd777 said:

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU, Alan. I'm hoping this helps to shut everybody up. You've fully explained everything, and this should hopefully stop all of the "well, why don't they do this....why don't they do that!"

I sure hope you continue to contribute to these boards from time to time, as I can think of a BUNCH of things where your insight would prove most valuable.

If the goal as you put it was to "shut everybody up", (your words, not Alan's), then a blog posting with comments disabled could have been made. Otherwise feedback should be expected. For better or worse, two-way conversation is what happens when public statements are made on a forum.

Shutting everybody up is your agenda, not his and while I agree that his and Neil's insights have been interesting and informative, none of us were ever entitled to any of this information in the first place.

"Shutting everybody up" was meant to be about those who whine and keep asking and wondering why fDeluxe doesn't do this or that or why haven't they tried this or that with Prince.

It wasn't about not hearing comments at all!

alexnvrmnd777 said:

babynoz said:

If the goal as you put it was to "shut everybody up", (your words, not Alan's), then a blog posting with comments disabled could have been made. Otherwise feedback should be expected. For better or worse, two-way conversation is what happens when public statements are made on a forum.

Shutting everybody up is your agenda, not his and while I agree that his and Neil's insights have been interesting and informative, none of us were ever entitled to any of this information in the first place.

"Shutting everybody up" was meant to be about those who whine and keep asking and wondering why fDeluxe doesn't do this or that or why haven't they tried this or that with Prince.

It wasn't about not hearing comments at all!

Mr. Leeds if you're still around, thanks a lot for coming here and help us seeing things more clearly. It's deeply appreciated by most of us.

It's fair enough if you're tired of answering here but just in case, allow me to ask you a few questions concerning this affair and the somewhat similar situation with The Time. We have MANY discussions here that lead nowhere because of a lack of FACTS and maybe you could clear this once and for all since you were there back in the days

For a reminder, Neil says that no proper contract was signed with The Family in 1985 and that the band might have some interest in the remasters if they were to happen. We also know that The Time claim that Prince won't let them release their newly recorded reunion album as "The Time".

So my questions are:

1) Did any of the artists Prince ghostwrote, weither they were bands like The Time and The Family or individuals like Sheila, Jill Jones, Carmen Electra, etc. have a proper contract directly with Warner Bros Records, or were all these albums released only through Prince's own contract with WB?

2) It seems that Prince considers any songs he touches as being HIS music, period. Do you think that his only reason to prevent The Time and The Family to use their "old" names is to maintain a complete ownership on all the material they recorded with him, and any future rerelease/remastering of it? Could there be any other reason?

3) You said that the rights to most of Paisley Park's records reverted back to Prince. How is this possible? How come WB didn't retain the rights in the same way they retained the rights to the "Prince" albums?

4) It is known that at the same time he attempted to trademark the name The Family in 2009, Prince went as far as to try (and possibly succeeded) to trademark names such as Mazarati and Good Question, bands he had little (if anything) to do with: for what purpose? Can he legally claim anything about Good Question's album, a record he wasn't involved with at all?

5) In the end there's a huge number of grey areas: collaborations such as He's So Dull and River Run Dry (composed by a bandmember, arranged and recorded by Prince, performed by yet another artist), albums like Pandemonium or Sheila E., which were half-Prince/half-the real artist, the Mavis Staples songs Prince composed but did not record, or even your own brother's Times Squared (basically Prince's music, but Eric co-composed and co-arranged a good part of it). Can Prince claim everything as his and rerelease all these records (at least anything he was musically involved with) without any of the persons involved claiming their share of it? Could the contracts (or lack of contracts) he had with the artists and/or WB back then allow this?

6) Could Prince go as far as trying to reclaim the masters of non-WB songs such as Sugar Walls or Manic Monday, since he kind of did everything on them but the vocals and some overdubs, or is this unthinkable of, by the industry's legal standards?

I know you're not in Prince's mind but as a professional who were there and therefore knows exactly what were the contractual terms of all these artists and projects, I thought you might help us clear this whole mess. My humble opinion is that Prince has plans for his back-catalogue and that this whole The Family/The Time situation is related to these plans. I'd like to know your opinion regarding this and the related questions above.

Many many thanks for your contributions

...

[Edited 5/23/11 10:25am]

laurarichardson said:

OzlemUcucu said:

He completely flipped out lately. He's going through trans4mations..

I am sorry but this guy posting the band's business on this board is unprofessional. In addtion, at no point in time did he answer any of Militant's questions.

If the Family never had a finalized contract how they entitled to royalties? What does finalized contract mean. Either they had a contract or they did not. The band and their manager need to go to WB for royalty statements not Prince and his current mgmt and I am sure his current management would like to stop receiving phone calls about royalties that they know nothing about.

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

yet another great post Laura. you clearly have never worked on business contracts. they go through many revisions until all parties finally sign them. ughhh.

laurarichardson said:

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

Clearly you have some movie ending type fantasy about how the courts work. Whoever has the most money and time tends to prevail- EVEN if the law is on the side of the other person. Sometimes people get huge settlements- that never get paid. So what is the point of going to court with someone who has money, time and a chip on their shoulder.

Also- if a thousand rumours are flying about something it is not in the LEAST unprofessional to drop in and attempt to clear said rumours.

Square1entertainment said:

Prince offered “to help” should the group agree to use another name - which we have - yet his manager has ignored numerous requests regarding the possibility of opening shows etc, save for a simple “I will pass on your message to Prince today” late last year. While we would appreciate an offer to open for him (or artists of similar standing) - he is an amazing live performer who plays to large crowds - we understand that its his call at the end of the day and he can put on whomever he wants. It’s HIS shows and he owes the band nothing (except the aforementioned) but to offer help then to ignore numerous follow-up emails/calls is disappointing.

Why hasn't he called? He said he would. I mean...I thought we had a really nice time on our date and he seemed totally into me. I just don't understand what could have happened. How could he do this? I thought he was a nice guy...but I guess he's just a jerk.

He's just not that into you.

Prince's ego is the problem. If The Time(especially) or The family releases a new cd nowadays its going to be bigger than any cd Prince has done since Emancipation. He just can't take it. Pretty pathetic really. I hope both groups just do it and call Prince's bluff. If Prince then tries to sue he will really get bad media attention. I hate that everyone is so scared of him and backs down. These guys need to stand up to him

Square1entertainment said:

Neil Richards

Square One Entertainment

. . .

Prince had raised the possibility of re-issuing the 1985 album by The Family, touring and “doing it how they should have done it” or words to that effect. While the group MAY have opted work with Prince again on a limited basis, I as a manager would be ensuring that all contracts were signed before we went any further.

. . .

I think this paragraph is key. Prince was ready to go along with a reunion of "The Family" if a reissue of the original album was part of the deal. Presumably that meant he would get a cut of the reissue profits (or all of them). The manager for The Family/Fdeluxe would not go along with this. So at least part of the dispute is about the original album and who gets to make money from it.

We're only hearing one side of the story here, and we're unlikely to ever hear Prince's side. But a lot of people are making assumptions based on one side of the story.

Zannaloaf said:

laurarichardson said:

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

Clearly you have some movie ending type fantasy about how the courts work. Whoever has the most money and time tends to prevail- EVEN if the law is on the side of the other person. Sometimes people get huge settlements- that never get paid. So what is the point of going to court with someone who has money, time and a chip on their shoulder.

Also- if a thousand rumours are flying about something it is not in the LEAST unprofessional to drop in and attempt to clear said rumours.

there are many cases out there of those who with little money have chosen to stand up to the rich and won. i don't recall that women with the baby dancing video who took on Prince and Universal to be wealthy, i could be wrong. I guarantee the minute anyone of these proteges decide to fight back Prince will back off or they will reach some sort of settlement. Until then, I've got my bets placed on who and when the next protege facebook rant will come from.

electricberet said:

Square1entertainment said:

Neil Richards

Square One Entertainment

. . .

Prince had raised the possibility of re-issuing the 1985 album by The Family, touring and “doing it how they should have done it” or words to that effect. While the group MAY have opted work with Prince again on a limited basis, I as a manager would be ensuring that all contracts were signed before we went any further.

. . .

I think this paragraph is key. Prince was ready to go along with a reunion of "The Family" if a reissue of the original album was part of the deal. Presumably that meant he would get a cut of the reissue profits (or all of them). The manager for The Family/Fdeluxe would not go along with this. So at least part of the dispute is about the original album and who gets to make money from it.

We're only hearing one side of the story here, and we're unlikely to ever hear Prince's side. But a lot of people are making assumptions based on one side of the story.

interesting. I went back and re-read that and this aspect of the story ends with this paragraph. wondering what happened at that point? Did Prince not want to sign a contract or vice versa?

electricberet said:

Square1entertainment said:

Neil Richards

Square One Entertainment

. . .

Prince had raised the possibility of re-issuing the 1985 album by The Family, touring and “doing it how they should have done it” or words to that effect. While the group MAY have opted work with Prince again on a limited basis, I as a manager would be ensuring that all contracts were signed before we went any further.

. . .

I think this paragraph is key. Prince was ready to go along with a reunion of "The Family" if a reissue of the original album was part of the deal. Presumably that meant he would get a cut of the reissue profits (or all of them). The manager for The Family/Fdeluxe would not go along with this. So at least part of the dispute is about the original album and who gets to make money from it.

We're only hearing one side of the story here, and we're unlikely to ever hear Prince's side. But a lot of people are making assumptions based on one side of the story.

It seems to me that Prince would've been willing to go along with a reunion if he was calling the shots. Wasn't the half the problem in the first place?

wonder505 said:

Zannaloaf said:

Clearly you have some movie ending type fantasy about how the courts work. Whoever has the most money and time tends to prevail- EVEN if the law is on the side of the other person. Sometimes people get huge settlements- that never get paid. So what is the point of going to court with someone who has money, time and a chip on their shoulder.

Also- if a thousand rumours are flying about something it is not in the LEAST unprofessional to drop in and attempt to clear said rumours.

there are many cases out there of those who with little money have chosen to stand up to the rich and won. i don't recall that women with the baby dancing video who took on Prince and Universal to be wealthy, i could be wrong. I guarantee the minute anyone of these proteges decide to fight back Prince will back off or they will reach some sort of settlement. Until then, I've got my bets placed on who and when the next protege facebook rant will come from.

I agree. There are attorney who would love to take on these cases pro bono. The problem is, will these artist who live off their songwritting and session work be blacklisted for going after one of the most highly respected artist? I say they should go after the back pay and file a class action lawsuit for Prince using the courts as threats--- but let everything else go. The time is now. Not only for their own situation but to make a huge statement that would stop Prince from doing this in the future to other musicians.

[Edited 5/23/11 11:06am]

wonder505 said:

electricberet said:

I think this paragraph is key. Prince was ready to go along with a reunion of "The Family" if a reissue of the original album was part of the deal. Presumably that meant he would get a cut of the reissue profits (or all of them). The manager for The Family/Fdeluxe would not go along with this. So at least part of the dispute is about the original album and who gets to make money from it.

We're only hearing one side of the story here, and we're unlikely to ever hear Prince's side. But a lot of people are making assumptions based on one side of the story.

interesting. I went back and re-read that and this aspect of the story ends with this paragraph. wondering what happened at that point? Did Prince not want to sign a contract or vice versa?

It's not clear what happened, but it doesn't sound like Prince was just being petty over emotional issues from 25 years ago. And this is coming from Fdeluxe's manager, who has no reason to be sympathetic to Prince.

This story keeps reminding me of the Beatles. Paul and John worked out their personal feud only a few years after the breakup. But no new music came out until almost 25 years later, because of lingering disputes over money.

NouveauDance said:

electricberet said:

I think this paragraph is key. Prince was ready to go along with a reunion of "The Family" if a reissue of the original album was part of the deal. Presumably that meant he would get a cut of the reissue profits (or all of them). The manager for The Family/Fdeluxe would not go along with this. So at least part of the dispute is about the original album and who gets to make money from it.

We're only hearing one side of the story here, and we're unlikely to ever hear Prince's side. But a lot of people are making assumptions based on one side of the story.

It seems to me that Prince would've been willing to go along with a reunion if he was calling the shots. Wasn't the half the problem in the first place?

Sounds plausible to me. Maybe he wanted to call the shots, and they wanted to make their own decisions. But we don't know exactly what went down, and we never will.

databank said:

Mr. Leeds if you're still around, thanks a lot for coming here and help us seeing things more clearly. It's deeply appreciated by most of us.

It's fair enough if you're tired of answering here but just in case, allow me to ask you a few questions concerning this affair and the somewhat similar situation with The Time. We have MANY discussions here that lead nowhere because of a lack of FACTS and maybe you could clear this once and for all since you were there back in the days

For a reminder, Neil says that no proper contract was signed with The Family in 1985 and that the band might have some interest in the remasters if they were to happen. We also know that The Time claim that Prince won't let them release their newly recorded reunion album as "The Time".

So my questions are:

1) Did any of the artists Prince ghostwrote, weither they were bands like The Time and The Family or individuals like Sheila, Jill Jones, Carmen Electra, etc. have a proper contract directly with Warner Bros Records, or were all these albums released only through Prince's own contract with WB?

2) It seems that Prince considers any songs he touches as being HIS music, period. Do you think that his only reason to prevent The Time and The Family to use their "old" names is to maintain a complete ownership on all the material they recorded with him, and any future rerelease/remastering of it? Could there be any other reason?

3) You said that the rights to most of Paisley Park's records reverted back to Prince. How is this possible? How come WB didn't retain the rights in the same way they retained the rights to the "Prince" albums?

4) It is known that at the same time he attempted to trademark the name The Family in 2009, Prince went as far as to try (and possibly succeeded) to trademark names such as Mazarati and Good Question, bands he had little (if anything) to do with: for what purpose? Can he legally claim anything about Good Question's album, a record he wasn't involved with at all?

5) In the end there's a huge number of grey areas: collaborations such as He's So Dull and River Run Dry (composed by a bandmember, arranged and recorded by Prince, performed by yet another artist), albums like Pandemonium or Sheila E., which were half-Prince/half-the real artist, the Mavis Staples songs Prince composed but did not record, or even your own brother's Times Squared (basically Prince's music, but Eric co-composed and co-arranged a good part of it). Can Prince claim everything as his and rerelease all these records (at least anything he was musically involved with) without any of the persons involved claiming their share of it? Could the contracts (or lack of contracts) he had with the artists and/or WB back then allow this?

6) Could Prince go as far as trying to reclaim the masters of non-WB songs such as Sugar Walls or Manic Monday, since he kind of did everything on them but the vocals and some overdubs, or is this unthinkable of, by the industry's legal standards?

I know you're not in Prince's mind but as a professional who were there and therefore knows exactly what were the contractual terms of all these artists and projects, I thought you might help us clear this whole mess. My humble opinion is that Prince has plans for his back-catalogue and that this whole The Family/The Time situation is related to these plans. I'd like to know your opinion regarding this and the related questions above.

Many many thanks for your contributions

...

[Edited 5/23/11 10:25am]

All interesting topics and smart questions. Unfortunately, as a former executive of Paisley Park Records there are a lot of aspects of these issues that I respectfully cannot discuss. It should also be noted that a lot of what transpired so many years ago simply isn't locked to my memory. So it would be irresponsible to speculate on the things I don't feel confident about factually. But fairness and fact freak that I am, I'll try to sort thru what I can within those boundaries.

Before the end of 1988, there was no one specifically charged with the day-to-day responsibilities of running Paisley Park Records. Instead, things were variously tended to by whatever management personnel was available and willing. Needless-to-say, a lot of clerical matters fell between the cracks. In January, 1989, Prince suddenly changed his entire management, financial and legal crews. The transitions to the new teams further complicated matters because the newbies had no previous knowledge about the structure of Prince's businesses or the players. It was then that I put together a team to run the label on a steady basis and I became a liason of sorts between the label and Warners in hopes of kindling some increased enthusiasm and support for Paisley projects. I'd like to think that the clerical aspects of running that business also then became more consistent and complete.

At that time, some artists were signed through Warners but those signed after late, 1988, were signed directly to Paisley. The joint venture between Paisley and Warners allowed for the records of those artists signed directly to Paisley or any that may have been signed to Prince's production company, to revert from Warners back to Paisley after a certain amount of time - a not uncommon arrangement in joint ventures. Conversly, Prince was always signed directly to Warner Brothers. At some point there was an agreement made that his records could be released with the Paisley Park logo on them to help boost the visibility and credibility of his label but he was never technically a Paisley Park artist himself. Thus his masters remain the property of Warner Brothers based on all the recording agreements he had with them.

I have no first hand knowledge and don't feel qualified to comment on his situation with Morris day and The Time. Of course their original contract was with Warners, having pre-dated the formation of the Paisley Park label.

A lot is speculated about Prince's motives for what he does and while I may have a personal opinion like anyone else, it's one thing to discuss the results of his (or anyone's actions), but I do believe it's dangerous and unfair to second guess one's motives - simply because none of us really know what's inside someone driving them to do what they do.

I'm not at liberty to discuss the status of any on-going contractual issues but I can say, in general, that unless an artists' original contract with Paisley specifically prohibits reissues, Prince should be in the position to re-issue, re-compile, re-master, just about do anything he wants to do with the material that was recorded for Paisley Park by artists signed directly to that label - in other words, any masters that Paisley Park owns.

As an aside, as someone with a lot of experience dealing with compilations and reissues, I have long believed that a properly packaged compilation of prime Paisley Park material, with a bit of bonus (previously unissued and/or "live" material) would make for a fabulous box set of a couple or three CDs. I assume Prince should be free to issue such a project either independently or with whatever label or distributor he chose to do business with. From a purely mercinary standpoint, it's "found money" for Prince and a boost to his legacy as a writer/producer. But I won't hold my breath. C'est la vie.

As for masters he produced for outside artists and labels, such as those you mention - SUGAR WALLS and MANIC MONDAY: I can only assume that those masters belong to the labels they were produced for, pursuant to the terms of the agreements between those labels and the artists who recorded the songs. It's highly unlikely that as an outside producer for those, and other such projects, Prince would have any authority whatsoever over those recordings and how they are issued.

Trademarking band names is something that a band and their managament should tend to early on. Theoretically, a recording label would want to know that a new band they were signing already could prove ownership of their name. Otherwise a label might invest in a band and risk ending up in an undesireable legal situation. Of course a savvy label that recognizes an artist failed to do so, would want to protect their investment by trying to register it themselves. In the early "mom and Pop" days of rock and roll, labels often owned groups names which eventually accounted for so many different personnels in popular groups like the Temptations, the Coasters and the Drifters. As artists and managers became more sophisticated, they realized the value in owning their own name and these days I would assume it's very uncommon for a label to beat a band to registering their Trademark.

As for the music on Paisley Park Records: obviously Prince rightly owns the copyright to any Prince composition. As for songs written by others that appeared on Paisley albums, in many cases Prince's companies may own or co-own the publishing rights to those songs according to whatever agreements were signed at the time between the composers and the companies.

However, as a general rule of thumb, ANY song that has been previously recorded and copywritten is available for any artist to record, cover, perform or whatever as long as they pay the proper licensing - writers and publishing - to the appropriate parties. In plain language, as long as the proper licenses and payments are honored, fDeluxe, or the Time, are free to record and/or perform any song they wish to...even songs that Prince wrote and owns.

Hope this helps clear up at least a few lingering issues.

I have to say that while we as fans are certainly entitled to our opinions about the music and musicians that we choose to support, it has been absolutely exciting to hear the perspective of the actual people involved!

Thanks to Alan and Square One Entertainment for interacting with us here on the org!

(If there is anything that I can do to help you enjoy your stay here, please don't hesitate to ask! I would love to continue to see your posts!)

CallMeCarrie said:

I have to say that while we as fans are certainly entitled to our opinions about the music and musicians that we choose to support, it has been absolutely exciting to hear the perspective of the actual people involved!

Thanks to Alan and Square One Entertainment for interacting with us here on the org!

(If there is anything that I can do to help you enjoy your stay here, please don't hesitate to ask! I would love to continue to see your posts!)

Well, Alan seems a lot more calm today, than yesterday based on his latest post, that's for sure. Maybe one day Alan, Prince, Fdeluxe and Neil, will find a way to work things out. With that being said, this calls for a classic reminder from back in the day from a bunch of guys who seemed to always remind folks to work things out...::drumroll please::

[Edited 5/23/11 16:01pm]

2elijah said:

CallMeCarrie said:

I have to say that while we as fans are certainly entitled to our opinions about the music and musicians that we choose to support, it has been absolutely exciting to hear the perspective of the actual people involved!

Thanks to Alan and Square One Entertainment for interacting with us here on the org!

(If there is anything that I can do to help you enjoy your stay here, please don't hesitate to ask! I would love to continue to see your posts!)

Well, Alan seems a lot more calm today, than yesterday based on his latest post, that's for sure. Maybe one day Alan, Prince, Fdeluxe and Neil, will find a way to work things out. With that being said, this calls for a classic reminder from back in the day from a bunch of guys who seemed to always remind folks to work things out...::drumroll please::

[Edited 5/23/11 15:45pm]

That's funny. The clip didn't show up when I first looked at your post, but I was able to guess what video it was anyway.

As Carrie said, I appreciate that Alan and others who have actual information about what is going on and what has happened in the past take the time to post on here. We have so many debates that boil down to a lack of information and facts.

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

Well, Alan seems a lot more calm today, than yesterday based on his latest post, that's for sure. Maybe one day Alan, Prince, Fdeluxe and Neil, will find a way to work things out. With that being said, this calls for a classic reminder from back in the day from a bunch of guys who seemed to always remind folks to work things out...::drumroll please::

[Edited 5/23/11 15:45pm]

That's funny. The clip didn't show up when I first looked at your post, but I was able to guess what video it was anyway.

As Carrie said, I appreciate that Alan and others who have actual information about what is going on and what has happened in the past take the time to post on here. We have so many debates that boil down to a lack of information and facts.

That's one of my favorite songs from the Beatles. Reading Alan's posts and Neil's kind of reminds me of a broken family trying to work things out, but it's too bad they had to air it in public, instead of keeping it behind the scenes.

[Edited 5/23/11 16:29pm]

2elijah said:

electricberet said:

That's funny. The clip didn't show up when I first looked at your post, but I was able to guess what video it was anyway.

As Carrie said, I appreciate that Alan and others who have actual information about what is going on and what has happened in the past take the time to post on here. We have so many debates that boil down to a lack of information and facts.

That's one of my favorite songs from the Beatles. Reading Alan's posts and Neil's kind of reminded me of a broken family trying to work things out.

The parallels are very interesting. Both the Beatles and Prince started new record labels (Apple and Paisley Park) that were supposed to open up opportunities to new artists. Neither label was a long-term success in that regard, but both led to acrimonious disputes that lasted for years. George summed up the story quite well:

GaryMF said:

laurarichardson said:

I am sorry but this guy posting the band's business on this board is unprofessional. In addtion, at no point in time did he answer any of Militant's questions.

If the Family never had a finalized contract how they entitled to royalties? What does finalized contract mean. Either they had a contract or they did not. The band and their manager need to go to WB for royalty statements not Prince and his current mgmt and I am sure his current management would like to stop receiving phone calls about royalties that they know nothing about.

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

yet another great post Laura. you clearly have never worked on business contracts. they go through many revisions until all parties finally sign them. ughhh.

Well [Name calling snip - luv4u] I actually do have experience with contracts and I understand they go through revisions as terms and conditions are being worked out but the manager said the contracts were not finalized. No one should have agreeded to work on this record if contracts were not signed or signed and some parties to the contract were not happy with the T&C's.

I just wanted the manager to answer that question. [Flame snip - luv4u]

Zannaloaf said:

laurarichardson said:

If Prince does not own the copyright then go ahead and use the name. Call his bluff since he has no legal leg to stand on and stop posting about this crap on this board.

Clearly you have some movie ending type fantasy about how the courts work. Whoever has the most money and time tends to prevail- EVEN if the law is on the side of the other person. Sometimes people get huge settlements- that never get paid. So what is the point of going to court with someone who has money, time and a chip on their shoulder.

Also- if a thousand rumours are flying about something it is not in the LEAST unprofessional to drop in and attempt to clear said rumours.

[Flame snip - luv4u] The bottom line is the Family needs to put up or shut up.

Trust me the manager putting this business matter on this board is unprofessional and if Prince were doing this you and other orger would be the first ones to bitch about it.

laurarichardson said:

Zannaloaf said:

Clearly you have some movie ending type fantasy about how the courts work. Whoever has the most money and time tends to prevail- EVEN if the law is on the side of the other person. Sometimes people get huge settlements- that never get paid. So what is the point of going to court with someone who has money, time and a chip on their shoulder.

Also- if a thousand rumours are flying about something it is not in the LEAST unprofessional to drop in and attempt to clear said rumours.

[Flame snip - luv4u]

Oh, em, gee.....