Jon said:

Co-Sign to all that. You are correct the boot in combo with his released stuff are what has kept me interested. One boot from 83 that'll make me go "OMG You Guys!" will keep me in tow for a long time. It's the boots that remind me why I am a fan...and why I like this guy.

I'm not saying he has to do anything. But if it were me, I'd be doing some hard thinking about trying to release this stuff myself. I don't say this selfishly, but more logically...He gets upset over the boot thing, yet the boot thing can't be stopped. Well as the line goes...if you can't beat em..join em.

OK...and it's not like there were thousands of folks doing this...just a small (compared to his entire fan base) just a small faction of people who were like kids in a candy store when they discovered it. As mentioned he punished the adoring minnows instead of going after the big fish.

NouveauDance said:

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

prodigalfan said:

Perhaps this site will give you clear examples of what was being discussed. http://www.paisleyparkvault.com/



So Londell & them think we can't discuss boots, eh? Let's see.

BlaqueKnight said:

OK, I don't see the "buy here" button.

imo he loves/hates us, for the same and different reasons. on the one hand he loves us when come to his parties and dance but he hates us if and when we take his picture in a public airport

then again, from his perspective a bunch of weird strangers are out there at housequake making calendars of him, yakking it up about bootlegged material in terms of trade/sale.

knowing how he feels about idolatry and control over his work .. . well i don't know the man at all but i'd think he'd be pissed. or strongly displeased.

so is he being an ass about shutting housequake down? i don't think so. he has a right to shut down distribution of his music that hasn't been authorized by him for distribution. also, i don't know the law regarding this, but imo he likely has a right to shut down activities associated with, that could be construed to encourage, bootlegging, such as trading discussions.

should he do this? i dunno. dunno why he doesn't just release the bootlegged material himself. at the NPGMC.
because people will buy the official release.

thebumpsquad said:

Hey man, you do a great justice to HQ and your own site and I respect that very much!! With that said..even though HQ and other sites don't PROMOTE the sales of bootlegs, and rather promotes FREE trading of such materials....some of which are being traded are Global Funk, Sabotage, Thunderball(RIP), Ladybird, Premium, etc bootlegs WHICH ARE SOLD originally. Now, Prince's lawyers do have a point here...by trading those bootlegs out, you are PROMOTING those bootleg companies that SELL bootlegs. Meaning, you, me and those that trade those titles are spreading word of those companies who profit from bootlegs and inadvertanly advertise their stuff. Now with this being said, down the line..trade after trade after trade, it may cause ppl to want to buy those bootlegs since they are so well established companies, well-known. Not you and me mind you, but those that trade them out. Even though, its hard to prove that yeah someone may start buying GF or Sab titles after the receive a title from a trade, its still a chance; a small chance that this may happen. This is what Prince wants to avoid.

In my opinion, its not a BIG ENOUGH difference to shut down a whole trading forum for....or make a big deal over. There are two sides to the bootleg world, the sale and the trade sides...these will always remain, nothing can stop them.

Since Prince's lawyers are so adament about bootleg companies like Sab and Global Funk getting advertisement, my solution would be to BAN ALL trading of Sab, Global Funk bootlegs or any bootlegs from companies that sell bootlegs for profit. I wonder if that would make Prince's lawyers happy.
[Edited 9/29/04 17:14pm]

XxAxX said:

the issue of the calender and bootlegs aside for a moment, i'd love to get clear about how exactly Prince DOES feel about idolatry? i know what he SAYS about it, but what he does and what he says don't always mesh very well, imo. i'm confused by the mixed messages. he doesn't seem to mind idolatry in the form of people wearing clothing with his name, face, or symbol all over it, nor does he seem to have a problem selling items vis the NPGMC with his name, face and symbol all over them, or picture books such as the Hawaii book full of him posing and preening. why does he think anybody would buy such a book anyway? it's because the fans IDOLIZE him and enjoy looking at pictures of him and he knows it and doesn't mind catering to that desire if it makes him a profit. which is fine by me. but if he truly didn't want to be idolized like he claims, he wouldn't sell items that glorify and objectify his physicality.

i think Prince is ambivalent about his hardcore fans. i truly think he enjoys and gets off on the fact that people adore him and his music so much to the point that they'll practically dedicate their lives (or at least all their free time) to the love his music and following his career, in whichever way they choose to express their love (and i'm not refering to bootlegs here. i mean the folks who go to all his shows, the PP parties when they had them, would buy everything possible from him such as tshirts and other various merchandise, or the folks who yell out "I LOVE YOU" [especially the attractive ladies ) and get all excited at te sight of him and wear his face andname plastered all over themselves, etc).

yet at the same time, i think the concept of anyone being that way towards another person disgusts and repells him -- i think he sees it as a form of personal degradation. he's never been a person to bow down or kowtow towards ANYBODY and i think it's beyond his comprehension to understand how a person can act that way and in that respect, he gets disgusted by the hardcores.

as far as that calender issue is concerned, i think that's a control issue. sure, maybe technically people shouldn't be using unauthorized pictures to make a calender, but as far as i understand that calender wasnt for profit. so what, really, is the big deal? some fans love an artist and wanted to make a calender of said artist for their own personal enjoyment. talk about turning in a molehill into a mountain. there are bigger fish to fry and i'm sure his lawyers are capable of pinning those bigger fish down if they really wanted to. i don't get why his lawyers don't go find those bigger fish and leave the little guys alone. <---talking about the calender thing specifically here
[Edited 9/29/04 17:34pm]

TimCalhoun said:

I think the calendar thing and pic thing was just icing on the bootleg cake.

superspaceboy said:

yep seems kind of like rubbing salt in the wound or twisting the knife a bit just to make a point

i'm so late on this...if it weren't for peeps sending me pm's regarding p's latest antics i would be completely out of the loop, lol.

i've only got one word:

typical.

NouveauDance said:

UPTOWN got sued, along with others running Prince fan websites, in 1999. But the case was settled on terms very favorable to UPTOWN. You can read more about it here.

The Prince Family, which did not get sued, voluntarily shut down in protest of the lawsuits, leaving the Internet without a comprehensive, unbiased source of Prince news. So, I suggested to Ben and Kevin that prince.org launch its own news service. Their answer was essentially, "Sounds like a good idea, but who will run it?" So I volunteered for the job.

Shortly after we launched our news service, Ben and/or Kevin added the ability for people to post comments below news items. This feature became very popular and turned the original version of prince.org into a de facto web discussion forum. (Sadly, I think this was what led to the PPML's demise, but I recognize that most folks probably prefer the instant gratification of Web discussion to a once-a-day email digest.) IMHO the popularity of the news comment feature is what inspired the current format of the .org.

Sorry about the digression into shameless self-promotion and .org history.

Anyway, I believe that the remaining website you mentioned also voluntarily went offline, without being sued.

Edited to add: Actually, according to UPTOWN, the Interactive Experience did get sued.

from another thread that was locked recently. I think that there is a need for Anxiety to say something about his real experiences on housequake.com, i.e. to correct his first statement.


nickfunk



chookalana said:

lol, you are so right. Housequake is a much more friendly neighborrhood...


Anxiety said:

coulda fooled me. i get flamed every time i post there.
it's a good site, but i dig the vibe here best.


housequake said:

??? Why would you say that?
Anxiety you were really never ever flamed on Housequake.com.


Anxiety said:

i always get chilly reception over there at best. just stating an opinion based on my experiences. don't worry, i'm not gonna sue.


housequake said:

Chilly reception? If you think Housequake.com sucks hard, then just say it out loud. But don't accuse us for flaming you.
FYI: http://www.housequake.com...serid=2546
I dont' see any flaming there. Now do I???

It's just like the warm reception I got when I logged into this site today: A couple of Orgnotes from your trusted members here, hoping we get sued. Now thats cool huh?


Anxiety said:

So if I state an opinion about my experiences on your site, I get barked at by its owner?


housequake said:

You accused us of flaming you. And that is simply not true.
Why can't I object to that, and proof everyone else that is not the case?
Proof: http://www.housequake.com...serid=2546


Anxiety said:

you gonna pull up my private messages for everyone too?


housequake said:

That's private, all I am showing are the public messages for everyone to see.

I'm a lawyer. I've written "lawyer letters" like the letters Housequake received. And I find the second letter very telling.

In that letter, a lawyer representing Prince and the NPG Music Club responds to Housequake's assertion that there is nothing illegal about merely discussing bootlegs. The letter provides various citations to legal authority to support general statements about copyright law. But the letter cites absolutely no authority whatsoever for the specific proposition that simply discussing bootlegs (or providing an Internet forum for such discussion) violates copyright law.

Why not? Well, the Law Office of Matthew W. Conrad is small and humble, and I don't have a subscription to either of the two major online legal research sites (Westlaw and Lexis). And since it's past 3 a.m. here, I can't run out to a law library and do old-fashioned book research. But, I suspect that Prince's lawyers have already done the research and that the reason they cite no authority is that... there is none.

Running a bootleg trading forum is, in my professional opinion, an unwise idea, and I have no problem with Prince trying to shut that down. (I think it's a bad business decision, but it's his right.) However, I object to his apparent attempt to stifle free expression.

* * *

Now, with the substantive law out of the way, let's look at the procedural problems facing Prince.

First, there's an issue as to whether a U.S. court has personal jurisdiction over Housequake. (I'm assuming that if Prince were to file suit, he'd do it in the U.S., as he did in the 1999 UPTOWN lawsuit.) The existing case law on this issue (that I'm aware of, anyway) is largely unhelpful because most of the cases have dealt with commercial websites, not non-profit discussion forums.

Second, even if a U.S. court finds that it does have jurisdiction, there's an issue as to whether that court is a proper "venue" for such a case.

Third, even if the U.S. court finds that it is a proper venue, there's an issue as to whether said court is the proper "forum." (Yes, this is a different issue from #2.)

Fourth, even if Prince clears the jurisdiction, venue, and forum hurdles, and even if he manages to win in a U.S. court, Housequake probably has no assets in the U.S. that could be seized if Housequake refuses to satisfy the judgment. Prince's remedy would then be to hire a lawyer in Holland and ask a court there to enforce the judgment. Would a Dutch court enforce a U.S. judgment? Probably yes... unless Housequake could convince the Dutch court that the U.S. court didn't actually have personal jurisdiction. So Housequake gets the proverbial "second bite at the apple" on the jurisdiction issue.

[Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, the above is not legal advice, creates no attorney-client relationship, and is for discussion purposes only.]

matt said:

thanks for the analysis! i was kinda hoping you'd have a look.

Yes, thank you to Matt for this very interesting legal analysis.


nickfunk

YEAH YEAH...AS PRINCE IS SO CONCERNED IN SELLING PURPLE HAT-SHAPED BOXES FULL OF SHIT 4 THE PRICE OF GOLD...I'D RATHER SPEND MY MONEY ON BOOTLEGS...CUZ 4 ME IT WAS ALWAYS ABOUT THE MUSIC....
I HAVE ALL THE OFFICIAL ALBUNS AND ALL THE MAXI-SINGLES, E.P.'S, ETC I COULD GET...HE'S NOT LOSE MONEY HERE...BUT HE'S SLOWLY LOSING MYU RESPECT...AND I'M NOT NOT PROUD 2 SAY THIS!
[Edited 9/30/04 7:02am]

alert! alert! hq got another letter...now they had to get rid of all the pix of p on their site. gawd, this is some boolchit....

And if he succeeds in bullying them and they stop using any pictures of Prince, we can all kiss our org avatars goodbye too.

Of course, as far as I know no major star with a huge fanbase and many fansites has forced FANSITES to stop using pictures of them from throughout their career - pictures that have ben out there FOREVER, and many of which (especially lots of the earlier ones) are NOT owned or copyrighted by Prince OR the NPG.

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

theblueangel said:

Not all of us!

nickfunk said:

We all know from some of the posts on NPGMC and the Quake how some of the Housequake people feel about the Org. We know how all sites feel about the Org. If this is gonna turn into some tit-for-tat bullshit
please post it all and let the truth speak for itself.

TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:

the shit's childish and unneeded.

matt said:

Matt,
You are dead on. (I read each of those cases after reading the letters.)

S

Edited to say: This is my opinion, not legal advice.
[Edited 9/30/04 8:22am]

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

Exactly. That's why I said that.

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

What the fuck man?!
They even deleted my fucking avatar...
It's time someone puts their h4x0r skillz to the test and fuck around with that cunting NPGMC shite site...

Neversin.

TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:

it's just as old and tired as the "michael vs. prince" chit, man. y'know, i've been a member of the 'quake for about 3 years (probably longer than that, as their site was one of the first that i came across when i first got into the online prince steez 5 years ago) and up till now i haven't heard any ill-will towards the 'quake. they absolutely do not deserve all the piss-mouthed retorts and commentary that some folks have been giving them--hq is one of the remaining strong forces within the prince online community, not just for pictures and all that stuff but for their overall goodwill. hq is a rarity: a place where you don't get bombarded with the overbearing drama n'such, y'unnastand? no constant drone of either "omg liek prince is teh god!!!1111!1" or "prince can go to hell with nitroglycerin drawerz on!" it's well-balanced, and the people there are kind.

as for all this my-fansite-can-beat-up-your-fansite bullshit, it really needs to stop. honestly. if there's one thing that we ALL need to do right around now, it's to show some solidarity and support for those guys. free the 'quake.

Neversin said:

It's funny...my av over there had nothing to do with Prince. Looks like they did a mass deletion. Let's hope they bring back the avvies that people either created on their own or had nothing to do with P.

How ironic people are defending prince when he files a lawsuit, simply because its his right to do so. But GOD FORBID, some of us filed BBB complaints back in 2002, when that was our right to do so as well.

BS like this is the #1 reason I have no problem asserting my rights as well when the "club" fucks around with it's customers.

This is also the same reason Prince deserves to get sued when his bodyguards steal someones camera...

And I have less and less sympathy for his battle with the big bad record companies. Because after all, he signed it away, it's their right to keep it.

It's all about ethics, when Prince needs something and the law isn't on his side. But when Prince wants to start some shit of his own, its all about the letter of the law.

i cant think of any logical reason why Prince would put such a stranglehold on websites that were meant to support him. honestly, it is this necessary to demand that pictures and such be removed? this is an outrage.

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

I feel Handclaps but I have not noticed a bombardment of the Org trying to diss HQ. I am also a member of HQ.