Has any website been sued? Do we have any lawyers that can explain a cease and desist letter?

I think we need a little clarity on what is going on with P and the fansites.

laurarichardson said:

Good point. I'd like to see the transcripts. If some of the sample Web Sheriff emails prove to be real, then they really are crap at what they do.

I'm not a lawyer, but I was the contracts law manager for one of Britain’s best known entities, so I've been on both ends of international court cases a thousand times.

A cease and desist is a thread of action, rather than the actual action of suing someone. However, then can be several types of cease and desist. Unless the org and housequake are lying (which I’m sure they are not), then Prince is taking the cease and desist approach to scare people into action without having to incur the cost of actually going to court. Probably because he is on very dodgy legal ground.

So prince is not suing his fans, he is threatening to sue his fans.

The way I look at it is its irrelevant. The fact that they couldn’t simply ask for said items to be removed speaks volumes for the utter contempt against a very loyal fan base.

The most bizarre part seems to be the whole unprofessional approach he seems to take. He is clearly trying to enforce copyright issues on sections where he is not the copyright owner. He doesn’t seem the grasp the law himself. Unless he simply hopes to bluff.

Its a mirror of his tactics against Uptown. A magazine he had officially endorsed until he seemed to get jealous about is circulation and freedom of speech.

He really needs a good business manager!

"cease and desist approach to scare people into action without having to incur the cost of actually going to court. Probably because he is on very dodgy legal ground. "

This is what I have been thinking. The letters are just scare tactics. I don't think he has a good case to have everything removed and I think he knows that but is using the letters to try a get the website owners to close.

So he is threating to sue the owners of his websites not indivdual fans. (Which the record labels have done.)

I would like to see the real story get out and have always been interested in how news stories get twisted.



-----

SquirrelMeat said:

laurarichardson said:

True it does get twisted (and has already).

However, I personally think an attack (or threat) on a loyal fan site that goes out of its way to obey by the rules, is an attack on every fan that uses it.

laurarichardson said:

I'll say. We literally dont know what we're talking about yet folx are up in arms. About what, they have no idea. Its crazy how fast a rumor can affect people.

No! No one has been sued, yet! There have been threats though and where I'm from we don't take too kindly to threats!

I think the majority of this mess is Web Sheriff's doing! (That's right I said it, send me an email! )

I'd really love to see exactly what Prince asked them to do and what they took it upon themselves to do! They've been trying to bully the internet for a while now, then they ran up against TPB, who told them publicly and in no uncertain terms to get bent!

They've been a little touchy ever since! Somehow they latched on to Prince while he was in London and probably figured they'd use his celebrity to give them some clout. Too bad, it's turned into a PR nightmare. So now they're rephrasing their intent and back peddling faster than Lance Armstrong peddles forward!

Web Sheriff
[Edited 11/7/07 18:13pm]

It could be a combonation of things. P getting bad advice on what to do about copyright issue, websheriff being overzealous and Universal trying to collect every dollar.

SexyBeautifulOne said:

JonnyApplesauce said:

I would just like to say this....Chicken Little

SquirrelMeat said:

You've nailed it exactly !
The websites involved need not comply with these cease and desist letters because they are not infringing on any copyright with regards to photographs.

The danger here is that if the websites don't comply Web Sheriff might try to refer the matter to their hosting provider. He will hold the provider responsible for hosting the so called "infringing" content and send them a DMCA notice. If this provider doesn't properly investigate this matter, they might simply comply and shut down the website just to be safe.

I am very familiar with DCMA notices and copyright infringement and this is wat generally happens when website owners do not comply.

Of course they can switch providers and start all over - but WS can go after them again. The best plan of action is to get their own dedicated server but that's a rather costly affair - or move the servers to Russia or China
[Edited 11/8/07 2:40am]
[Edited 11/8/07 2:41am]

VenusBlingBling said:

All you have to do is read the letters that have been posted, then listen to the site founder's podcast to find out what'sgoing on. Then judge for yourself.

If you really want an intelligent informed explanation, your going to have to log on to Housequake.com , they have mods especially one lady that is in the legal field and most of they're people are respected professionals. Mostly big mouth kids over here.

Ottensen said:

I have. Thats how I know nobody knows whats going on.

wlcm2thdwn said:

They have a few folks here on this board that are in both the entertainment and legal field as well. In all sincerity some people on the legal end of this issue could have a vested interest in not posting at this time, but that's only my opinion. In addition, not to be facetious in any way, but frankly with it being 2007 and in today's litigous society we live in, I honestly assumed everyone knows what a 'cease and desist' letter means.

wlcm2thdwn said:

I probably shit more cash than you earn in a year. Thats how professional I am.

Do tell, as most of "they're people" are respected professionals, which ones and in which professions? I know a great deal of them and I don't seem to think they are any better than the poeple on here.

-----
[/quote]

True it does get twisted (and has already).

However, I personally think an attack (or threat) on a loyal fan site that goes out of its way to obey by the rules, is an attack on every fan that uses it.[/quote]


Too true! How are you Squirrel? Long time no see!

DoMeBaby69 said:

True it does get twisted (and has already).

However, I personally think an attack (or threat) on a loyal fan site that goes out of its way to obey by the rules, is an attack on every fan that uses it.[/quote]


Too true! How are you Squirrel? Long time no see![/quote]

Hello babe!

I've been taking a few weeks off.....Prince overkill at the O2! I'm all better now. I come back to find prince is going crazy on us again!

Hello all! I posted this on the pfu thread just now, but having seen the familiar faces on this one, you'll forgive me if I cut and paste rather than think of something new.....:

Isn't half the problem here the general lack of clarity as to what the complaint being made is?

Until the original WebSheriff cease and desist stuff is actually published in full (and I'm not convinced that they can claim legal privilege to prevent the recipient disclosing it to whomsoever they chose in any event), the precise nature of the complaint that people are vociferously criticising (and on some occasions, I note, supporting) will remain open to interpretation and potentially misinterpretation.

For example, on Sky News last night, Sky wheeled out some "expert" who said that the complaint was about people reproducing "grainy images taken at his recent concerts" and nothing more. Said "expert" suggested that was understandable because grainy images might not present a true reflection of the standard of the concert, which presumably might then impact adversely on future ticket sales or any DVD release.

On the other extreme, there have been suggestions that we can't reproduce any lyrics during discussions, have to burn off our tattoos, or dare not whisper his name save when writing a cheque.

Unless and until Prince's side lay their cards on the table and are prepared to be open with the disclosure of the details of their complaint, all the uncertainty does is breed speculation, which itself gives rise to extreme reactions from people that are understandable, but perhaps at this stage based on misinformation.

Now it's not for me to say, and it would be no more that the sort of conjecture I've just been critical about, but it might be construed that the WebSheriff's refusal to be entirely open about Prince's complaint is down to concerns about the strength of their case.....

It would be terrible, would it not, for the whole thing to be out in the open, and then Sky's "expert" to say that Prince's position was a load of nonsense?

Anyway, in the spirit of Christmas, might I suggest that Prince lays his cards on the table and if he wants us to play by certain rules, then he should play by the well-recognised rules of fairness too?

(Of course, if I've missed actual disclosure of the letter, could someone point me to it so I don't look like a prat? Many thanks!)

Lord Marcus Mont (TM)
Veni Vedi Funki (TM again)(with kind permission from Julius Caesar)

JonnyApplesauce said:

Or at least a few are too dense to figure it out

LordMarcusMont said:

Well said you too!

SquirrelMeat said:

Too true! How are you Squirrel? Long time no see![/quote]

Hello babe!

I've been taking a few weeks off.....Prince overkill at the O2! I'm all better now. I come back to find prince is going crazy on us again![/quote]


Yes, it's gone mad hasn't it. Leaves us with a bitter taste now after the great summer we've just all had. I don't really know what to say about it all. Agree with LordMarcusMont though - until it's made plainly clear just what the issues are, I think that everybody should just calm down and wait and see. I'm sure it will all become clear and it may not be as bad as things look right now.
[Edited 11/8/07 8:04am]

Why would you assume that most people know what a cease and desist letter is?

Look at how the story has been twisted by the media and some of the comments on this board.
-----

Ottensen said: