Berry said:

He usually does that the same night of the concert.

TheSkinMechanic said:

can we atleast try to see things from his point of view?
here's the scenario...
You're a painter, you've painted a beautiful painting, and hung it on your wall for all of your friends and family to see. You don't really have any intentions of selling it, but it has crossed your mind as potential income if you choose to sell it. So you're stolling down the street and you waltz on into this shop and suddenly...you see...your painting on the wall, it even has your signature, but as you approach it you realize it's a copy. Someone took a picture of it, blew it up and sold it to this store!!! WHAT?!?!? but that's my painting, my signature, I didn't authorize this!! So you go up to the store manager and ask, hey! How and where did you get that painting? The manager says "oh, my friend gave it to me, for free." What?? gave it to you? well who's your friend you ask? The store manager says "it was willy whatshisface," and your like...what! who's that? and the manager says.."well he says he loves your work, he's a huge admirer of it" ...so you think, if he's such a big fan of mine, why would he do this to me?
You go to willy whatshisface and you ask him to take the copy down from the store because you really don't want it up in there, and he says "No way, I'm not taking it down, untill you get a court order that says I have to take it down!" Well now you're hurt, and pissed, you can't believe that someone who admires your work like he does would do this to you and then refuse to remedy the situation when you asked him to. What's worse is..the next day you see another copy of your painting in a resturant, except when you ask the resturant manager where it came from he tells you that the owner paid big bucks to get that exclusive copy!! Now, not only are there unauthorized copies of your painting floating around...but someone somewhere is making a killing off of your painting. OK, so now you go over you options in your head...well...I could say ahh screw it...it's free advertising for my work, but damn it...that would be letting willy and who ever else run my life, and profit off of my work!! I can't just sit here and let others do what ever they want with my art! It's mine to do with what I please...not theirs. Then you pick up your phone and call your lawyer...cause you know there's really no other choice.

Bottom line is...It doesn't matter if Prince is already rich, it doesn't matter what if any intentions he has in mind for his art. It's Prince's art to do with what he pleases...not anyone elses...PERIOD.

Berry said:

If you have ever downloaded a released song from the internet or made a tape/cd copy Berry you are a hypocrite because there are NO artists who support that practice and virtually every artist speaks out against it.

It is not apples and oranges you just don't worship the other artists the same way that you worship Prince so I guess other artists "feelings" don't matter to you.

This threadi s a bunch of BS and people need to stop placing Prince on a pedastal above other artists. If you copy released music you have NO right to speak out against bootlegging of any kind. Pirating in my mind is a MUCH bigger offense and problem then bootlegging. This practice actually does cost the artist money as opposed to bootlegging which doesn't cost Prince a penny.

Is bootlegging wrong? YES

Does it hurt the artist? YES

What is the only way to stop it? Release the music YOURSELF. Basic concept of Supply and Demand works here. Welcome to capitalism! Unless you're going to start arresting people for owning bootlegs..

anemone said:

How have the hundreds of bootlegs hurt Prince?



I believe possession is not illegal, if it was, I'm sure he'd try to get people arrested for it.

I know that many fans think that the unreleased "Miss Understood" is a weak/ cheesy song, I love it , I got it for for free, when I think that it might never officially see the light of the day (P shoud give it to Bjork!),
Berry, you don't know what you're missing girl...

Berry said:

And he still can. Over and over. No one took HIS recording. They made one of their own and Prince can still do with his own recording what he wants, which is what he always does, listen to it, beat down the musician because they made a tiny mistake and then locks it in his vault never to be heard again.



But no one took HIS race car/recording. Prince stil has it. And if he would release it people would buy it. There is clearly a demand for live recordings, yet he doesn't acknowledge that and doesn't release anything. Yes he's going to release the ONA box. But that's a mix of various shows, and most people really would like to have the show they went to.

Plus he's not going to loose any money over it, since most bootleg buyers also buy the official stuff.
[This message was edited Fri Oct 4 13:43:44 PDT 2002 by JeePee]

lovemachine- I was referring to an above post about cassette recordings. As far as downloading music...I never have. End of story. Where do you come off, I have done NOTHING but talk about "artists rights" and used Prince as a point of reference...this is prince.org isnt it?

anemone said:

Berry said:

What I am saying, and I believe that I said very clearly, is that people who make cd copies, audio tape copies, accept cd copies from their friends, or download music have no right to speak out against bootlegging of any kind. Piracy is a much bigger offense then bootlegging will ever be.

When I speak of Prince versus other artists is because I am telling you that it is a two-way street that you can't support Prince in his arguement if you partake in any of the above transgressions even if it is with other artists.

The question, "Where do I come off" is laughingly funny coming from you as you started thread that basically rags on 95% of everyone here on Prince.org for doing wrong. I guess it's okay for you to criticize, but not for anyone else to question your motives.

I think challenging another is healthy if done with respect. So I don't mind you challenging me. What I meant by "where do u get off" was about you inferring over and over again that I am involved in "piracy", when I have clearly said I am not. I think you may have mistaken what we were talking about in reference to cassettes. We were talking about when we were kids and you would record records onto tapes etc...

You know, I don't think that anyone who boots in any way is a "bad" person. I do think that they are bad decisions however... with good intentions. I only try and put a perspective out there. Honestly.

Shorty said:

Your scenario doesnt work because:
1, The artist has not stowed away his creation, he has shown it to thousands of people night after night.
2, His creation is also a copy of his own creation which thousands or millions have also bought for cold hard cash previously.
3, The copy that the shop owner had would be dirty, torn a little and will have a bad case of colour fade.
4, The shopowner would have a handful of copies at the most, which, if bought at all, would be bought by admirers of the artists work.
5, If the artists decides to sell his copy of his previous creation, he would make thousands or millions of copies available to the public who will buy them... including the handful of admirers who previously did business with the ever so naughty shop owner.



Bootlegging has never done ANY artist ANY harm at ANY time... However, piracy is a different thing altogether, burning CDs of official albums, copying onto cassette etc... but then again, I have done this in the past and occasionally still do, and all it does is keep my interst alive and have even gone out and bought the official release when i find i like something a lot. So even "piracy" isnt such a horrible thing either IMO
[This message was edited Mon Oct 7 5:55:19 PDT 2002 by TheSkinMechanic]

AaronForever said:

It would seem U urself admit that this man in fact supported and approved of illegal recordings by having links 2 other sites that had illegal Prince music 4 sell.

If a man robs a bank and U only drive the getaway car. Would that prove U are not guilty also 4 ur conduct of supporting and approving of the man that robed the bank.

DreamAngelFaith said:

Yeah, great comparison.

DreamAngelFaith said:

i don't dispute that the links were on his site. but i might also say that PRINCE HIMSELF "supported and approved of illegal recordings" by some of his past statements.




what joeycoco said