amethyst68 said:

morningsong said:

Uh, Mayte made a statement too that he had a will. Making a statement that he did something and expecting something out of it, again is NOT the same thing. I took it that all she was saying was that Prince didn't have a thing against wills, big whoop. At the time a divorce is final, in most states, the ex-spouse is NOT eligible in a will, most adults know this already, anything else is soap opera crap that keeps being forced into these silly little fan-fictions over and over again like that somehow makes it fact. And that religion thing, how many instances have you seen where somebody converts to being catholic or jewish or some other thing for their spouse to be, don't act like that something so rare. Isn't that changing your religion to be with a man/woman? Are you standing in judgment of everyone who has done that? Show me proof she lied.

Manuela didn’t convert to her boyfriend or husband’s religion. She pretended she was studying Jehovah’s Witness when she schemed her way into working at Paisley Park selling Prince souvenirs and t-shirts after graduating from college. [Edited 12/4/17 19:53pm]

I wasn't there, but I was here and I remember pretty well the stuff that was posted around here I don't need a retelling because most people don't repeat it correctly. I've seen enough to have my own opinions about who I think she is, I need nobody to sway me. If there is something new then sure I'd love to see something concrete.

Purplestar88 said:

morningsong said:

If it's not active then what's the big hoopla? She obviously isn't making any bank off of it nor getting any brownie points from celebrities for having it at this time. And Tyka said "to various people", which means he gave instructions to more than just her, and we have no idea to whom, when those instructions were given or for what. It's all a big wait and see what people do right now.

She can created her own name and trademarked it. She is married and has said negative things about Prince but want to be associated with him. It is in poor tase to bad mouth someone but have the nerve to trademark something she did not create or was even around for when it started. This is not about if she knows how to run a business or charity. It's about the principle of it. How does someone take ownership of something they did not create? She needs to be called out on her crap.

She did, it's called In A Perfect World. She hasn't done anything with L4OA as of yet so I'm really confused on what she is being persecuted for. Not one person has said one thing that sounds like this is really benefitting her personally in some way, yet.

morningsong said:

Susu1976 said:

morningsong said:

But all of that is one and a half plus years old, and what has she done with it? That's what I'm asking. I know she COULD do things but being able to and actually doing it is 2 completely different things. This isn't the Minority Report where you put someone on trial for something they haven't done yet, heck even in that movie you had to have a consensus of some very special people who actually saw the future of what was going to take place, not simply some random soap opera guessing at what someone MIGHT do. Ok yeah, she's said some questionable sentences over the years that CAN be taken in more than one way, omg, how rare does somebody around here do that? And her husband sang some songs, omg, let's get the kindling. If not one person attached to the Estate (there's at least 6 individual full grown adults minimum) is bitching about it, then how do you KNOW she did NOT have permission? Show me the money.

She said some questionable sentences?!? How about all the things she has done? They speak louder than words. I don't know why you are so hard pressed on defending her when evidence is presented to you and btw, she did NOT create INAPW by herself, that was all because of PRINCE! Why you are refusing to acknowledge this woman's past behavior when that is always the best prediction of future behavior is beyond me. But then again you made a point of saying in another thread that in an autopsy you don't understand what a urine test has to do with a gastric test so I leave it at that and Menes answered that comment brilliantly. I may not agree with Laura Richardson on a lot of things but she is spot on when it comes to ex-missus number 2. I know that in more ways than I can divulge here. Btw, not everything is about money. People want to be recognized, have clout, get in with THE people. You're with the in crowd. That can bring more gratification than money. In fact, that is why a lot of people get in to philanthropy unfortunately. Their ultimate goals are far from altruism. All you need to do is look at her IG and FB. Prior to Prince's passing not much celebrity stuff going on. And who would want to advertise you and your man being personas non grata in the biggest parties because Prince made is so? I said it before and other people have pointed it out to you now with an exhibit after an exhibit. This woman's history speaks for itself. Why would she act differently now that the only person who could have and in fact stopped her from capitalizing on his name is gone? Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you as you obviously have decided to look at things the certain way for whatever reason. Cool, whatever. [Edited 12/4/17 21:00pm] [Edited 12/4/17 21:03pm]

LOL

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Susu1976 said:

morningsong said:

Susu1976 said:

morningsong said:

Purplestar88 said:

She can created her own name and trademarked it. She is married and has said negative things about Prince but want to be associated with him. It is in poor tase to bad mouth someone but have the nerve to trademark something she did not create or was even around for when it started. This is not about if she knows how to run a business or charity. It's about the principle of it. How does someone take ownership of something they did not create? She needs to be called out on her crap.

She did, it's called In A Perfect World. She hasn't done anything with L4OA as of yet so I'm really confused on what she is being persecuted for. Not one person has said one thing that sounds like this is really benefitting her personally in some way, yet.

Exactly, she should use her own charity and stop trying to further associate herself with him when she bad mouth him. It is the intent of what she did. In a face of an tragedy the last thing I would think about is tradmarking something. If she was close to him maybe I would give her a break but she was not. She was not a family member or even a close friend to trademark anything associated with Prince. Just because the family is not complaing does not make it right. Also, just because she has not done anything with the trademark does not make it right either. She has the In the Perfect World charity if I am not mistaken Prince helped her with and that should be enough. You want to give her and the benfits of the doubt but sorry I see this women as very cunning who uses charity to cover what she is really about.

Purplestar88 said:

morningsong said:

She did, it's called In A Perfect World. She hasn't done anything with L4OA as of yet so I'm really confused on what she is being persecuted for. Not one person has said one thing that sounds like this is really benefitting her personally in some way, yet.

Exactly, she should use her own charity and stop trying to further associate herself with him when she bad mouth him. It is the intent of what she did. In a face of an tragedy the last thing I would think about is tradmarking something. If she was close to him maybe I would give her a break but she was not. She was not a family member or even a close friend to trademark anything associated with Prince. Just because the family is not complaing does not make it right. Also, just because she has not done anything with the trademark does not make it right either. She has the In the Perfect World charity if I am not mistaken Prince helped her with and that should be enough. You want to give her and the benfits of the doubt but sorry I see this women as very cunning who uses charity to cover what she is really about.

I doubt the family even knows about what she had done and some people should realize that if the family wanted to use L4OA as a charity arm once they inheirit that is now not going to happen.

laurarichardson said:

Susu1976 said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

LOL

Prove me otherwise.

huh?

I am agreeing with you.

Lighten up.

DD55 said:

Susu1976 said:

morningsong said:

This is what I mean about people repeating things incorrectly. In that other thread, I said what does a urine test have to do with a gastric test. Biologically your gastric system isn't directly connected to your bladder. The answer was the gastric test test the contents of the stomach, which is not the bladder. Those details are extremely important in understanding what's going on inside the body and I gravitate to people who understand those facts. Which is why I don't need random people to tell me what I'm allowed to think and say, if people feel they want to get all rude and bent out of shape because I'm not chasing after any and everything they throw out on the internet then so be it. As I said before I was right here on the org when all these things were originally talked about. I'm aware, thank you. You don't have to like me for my opinion but I'll be damned somebody's going to bully me out of ecpressing my own thoughts.

OMG. I. FUCKING. CAN'T. Ever heard of not it being a good thing trying to teach a fish how to swim? Obviously you didn't understand Menes's comment either and the whole thing seems to still go way over your head. That's on another thread so don't deflect. Btw, come to me when you have analysed 100+ autopsy reports. Keep this thread where is intended to be. I presented to you some issues about your comments. If you can't elaborate or offer counter arguments....

[Edited 12/4/17 22:25pm]
[Edited 12/4/17 22:26pm]

amethyst68 said:

laurarichardson said:

I doubt the family even knows about what she had done and some people should realize that if the family wanted to use L4OA as a charity arm once they inheirit that is now not going to happen.

Comerica or whoever the estate lawyers are know what she’s done. Go to the trademark website and see for yourself. There’s a letter showing the estate filed an opposition to the trademark earlier this year. So to the person saying maybe she applied for trademark 6 days after Prince died with the consent and approval of Prince’s family are wrong. The family knows about it and are against it. If I remember, the L4OA charitable foundation was started by Prince and Mayte during the first year of their marriage.

I am glad they know about it and hopefully they can do something. Her thoughtless ass did not think that they might want to do something with the name and that name is attached to property that is owned by the estate.

morningsong said:

Susu1976 said:

OMG. I. FUCKING. CAN'T. Ever heard of not it being a good thing trying to teach a fish how to swim? Obviously you didn't understand Menes's comment either and the whole thing seems to still go way over your head. That's on another thread so don't deflect. Btw, come to me when you have analysed 100+ autopsy reports. Keep this thread where is intended to be. I presented to you some issues about your comments. If you can't elaborate or offer counter arguments.... [Edited 12/4/17 22:25pm] [Edited 12/4/17 22:26pm]

Again this is what I mean I wasn't talking to Menes and the answer didn't come from Menes and if Menes answered I didn't read it because it didn't address what I was asking. In fact no one answered specifically what I asked and it's obvious here you haven't a clue what I was asking just like you're not addressing what I'm asking here but deflecting because I'm not jumping on the whoopie cushion to be foul over something I'm challenging folks to please explain what about this thing is foul. She's not making money and she not getting pets on the back and she's not getting awards so how has this been benefitting her? If you don't know then you don't know and jumping on me doesn't make it look like you know.

It is the intent of what she was trying to and thinking about right after his death. Have you missed the Finger Prince part for mechandise. Do you honestly think she did this for the benefit of the family?

Comerica has filed an objection because it is not okay that she did this.

laurarichardson said:

morningsong said:

laurarichardson said:

It is the intent of what she was trying to and thinking about right after his death. Have you missed the Finger Prince part for mechandise. Do you honestly think she did this for the benefit of the family?

Comerica has filed an objection because it is not okay that she did this.

So Comerica has filed something against her for having these? Please do show that, that would be quite interesting.

According to one of our orgers Comerica has filled an objection.

morningsong said:

amethyst68 said:

morningsong said:

So Comerica has filed something against her for having these? Please do show that, that would be quite interesting.

It says The Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson by Comerica Bank & Trust filed opposition 4/17/2017.

?

morningsong said:

amethyst68 said:

morningsong said: It says The Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson by Comerica Bank & Trust filed opposition 4/17/2017.

?

Why the question mark? The estate managers are opposed to her trademarking the name. The whole thing is so mental. Who ever heard of an ex that will not just go away already? This is a women who according to Dr. Funkenberry Prince just stopped speaking to her which was at a point were Dr. Funkenberry was the one who asked him about the school which means she has done nothing but tell lies from the mimute he died.

laurarichardson said:

morningsong said:

?

Why the question mark? The estate managers are opposed to her trademarking the name. The whole thing is so mental. Who ever heard of an ex that will not just go away already? This is a women who according to Dr. Funkenberry Prince just stopped speaking to her which was at a point were Dr. Funkenberry was the one who asked him about the school which means she has done nothing but tell lies from the mimute he died.

Time out. To be my blunt self...you just expect your word to be taken? That's what the question mark is about. "It" what? Not one link besides my own has been posted in THIS thread for people to read for themselves and make up their own minds, not one post besides these last couple of ones refers to anything that Comerica has on her yet people are posting general words like "it" and expecting that to be enough. Uh, nope. If you know something concrete share it.

laurarichardson said:

CandyCool said:

laurarichardson said:

Why the question mark? The estate managers are opposed to her trademarking the name. The whole thing is so mental. Who ever heard of an ex that will not just go away already? This is a women who according to Dr. Funkenberry Prince just stopped speaking to her which was at a point were Dr. Funkenberry was the one who asked him about the school which means she has done nothing but tell lies from the mimute he died.

Not only the estate managers are opposed to this. They are joined in their opposition by the Love 4 One Another Charities. Obviously she is not involved with those charities or they wouldn't object.

Again, please post something, anything, that supports what you are saying. It would be greatly appreciated.


Anything outside of repeating what Dr. Funkenberry said that is, like something official, not the he said, she said stuff.

[Edited 12/5/17 11:44am]

morningsong said:

CandyCool said:

morningsong said:

Again, please post something, anything, that supports what you are saying. It would be greatly appreciated.


Anything outside of repeating what Dr. Funkenberry said that is, like something official, not the he said, she said stuff.

[Edited 12/5/17 11:44am]

The US patent and trademark office is your friend.

Oh so now I've got to drop what I was doing in my life to go prove what you all are spreading in a public forum for all the world to see. You all are judging folks based on some words they said in public and yet you don't seem to realize you are being judged by what you are saying in public. Ok, then, no skin off my nose. But best believe in my book, your word is NOT golden.

CandyCool said:

morningsong said:

Again, please post something, anything, that supports what you are saying. It would be greatly appreciated.


Anything outside of repeating what Dr. Funkenberry said that is, like something official, not the he said, she said stuff.

[Edited 12/5/17 11:44am]

The US patent and trademark office is your friend.

Thank you. Apparently the opposition is posted at the site and if the actual charity is opposed then the estate is interested in doing something with the charity since property is still owned by the charity.

morningsong said:

CandyCool said:

morningsong said: The US patent and trademark office is your friend.

Oh so now I've got to drop what I was doing in my life to go prove what you all are spreading in a public forum for all the world to see. You all are judging folks based on some words they said in public and yet you don't seem to realize you are being judged by what you are saying in public. Ok, then, no skin off my nose. But best believe in my book, your word is NOT golden.

Okay do you not see the actual Trademark information in this post. Is it going to take time out of you day to push a button. Don't you think it is odd that the estate would be okay with M2 owing the name while they have decided to not sell property that the charity still owns?

laurarichardson said:

morningsong said:

Oh so now I've got to drop what I was doing in my life to go prove what you all are spreading in a public forum for all the world to see. You all are judging folks based on some words they said in public and yet you don't seem to realize you are being judged by what you are saying in public. Ok, then, no skin off my nose. But best believe in my book, your word is NOT golden.

Okay do you not see the actual Trademark information in this post. Is it going to take time out of you day to push a button. Don't you think it is odd that the estate would be okay with M2 owing the name while they have decided to not sell property that the charity still owns?

Yes it is going to take time I've allocated to other things. You thought it was important to let people know and I'm asking why do you think it's important. I've already expressed why I'm apprehensive about it. I don't run charities, I don't do trademarks, I'm not up on all the ins and outs of this stuff but if someone knows where the foul stuff is, please put it out in the plain open, shine a light on it, since it seems to be a matter of pushing a couple of buttons and you know exactly where it is it shouldn't be that big of an effort for you.

morningsong said:

laurarichardson said:

Okay do you not see the actual Trademark information in this post. Is it going to take time out of you day to push a button. Don't you think it is odd that the estate would be okay with M2 owing the name while they have decided to not sell property that the charity still owns?

Yes it is going to take time I've allocated to other things. You thought it was important to let people know and I'm asking why do you think it's important. I've already expressed why I'm apprehensive about it. I don't run charities, I don't do trademarks, I'm not up on all the ins and outs of this stuff but if someone knows where the foul stuff is, please put it out in the plain open, shine a light on it, since it seems to be a matter of pushing a couple of buttons and you know exactly where it is it shouldn't be that big of an effort for you.

See the link below. Took two seconds. The estate did not approve of what she was doing. Why would anyone think they would is beyond me. You do not own something so it is not yours to take and I guess you are going to pretend the trademark for making merchandise does not exisit.

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=87015620

Opposition

[Edited 12/5/17 12:15pm]