This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.
New topic 
Printable In honor of Radiohead... I have a video for them to listen to. 
| |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Prince is being a creep about the Radiohead song "Creep".  RIP, mom. I will forever miss and love you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OMG! NOT THE DANCING BABY AGAIN!
first get your facts str8. she was not sued, and certainly not by Prince. second. anybody with any sense doesnt put their child on the net like that. if it were meant for her family's eyes there are other ways to distribute videos to them. too many pervs. out there.  Prince did an interview with a woman at Record World. They talked about whatever, then he asked her: "Does your pubic hair go up to your navel?" At that moment, we thought maybe we shouldn't encourage him to do interviews. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
metallicjigolo said: OMG! NOT THE DANCING BABY AGAIN!
first get your facts str8. she was not sued, and certainly not by Prince. second. anybody with any sense doesnt put their child on the net like that. if it were meant for her family's eyes there are other ways to distribute videos to them. too many pervs. out there. Its the parents decision not YOURS if they want to have the video on the net of their kids.Prince CAN be behind the lawyers and the one with say so if he really didnt want that lawsuit he did have the right to stop the video or lawyers to even persue it right? Im quite sure Prince IS paying the "web sheriff" for his time on the web to see if anything illegal of his is being used. If you think they (web sherriff) is doing out of good graces I have to laugh at that 
I know plenty of parents that put videos/pictures up of their kids doing silly things (we do it on the org all the time) and gross things for that matter( Prince pulled all his pictures off the net at one point unless they have a watermark they cant stay they get pulled). But to even bring the "dancing baby" to light like Prince did, is heartless IMHO. He should of just left it alone or told his lawyers to back off( HE CAN DO THIS), but he didnt he persued a innocent mother and child for something petty NOW he is trying to make claim that "Creep" is HIS song! IT NOT HIS SONG! Its Radioheads Period! Sounds like you need to get your facts straight! [Edited 6/12/08 5:17am] Smurf theme song-seriously how many fucking "La Las" can u fit into a dam song 
Proud Wendy and Lisa Fancy Lesbian asskisser  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
psychodelicide said: Prince is being a creep about the Radiohead song "Creep".
co-sign Smurf theme song-seriously how many fucking "La Las" can u fit into a dam song
Proud Wendy and Lisa Fancy Lesbian asskisser | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
toots said: metallicjigolo said: OMG! NOT THE DANCING BABY AGAIN!
first get your facts str8. she was not sued, and certainly not by Prince. second. anybody with any sense doesnt put their child on the net like that. if it were meant for her family's eyes there are other ways to distribute videos to them. too many pervs. out there. Its the parents decision not YOURS if they want to have the video on the net of their kids.Prince CAN be behind the lawyers and the one with say so if he really didnt want that lawsuit he did have the right to stop the video or lawyers to even persue it right? I know plenty of parents that put videos/pictures up of their kids doing silly things (we do it on the org all the time) and gross things for that matter( Prince pulled all his pictures off the net at one point unless they have a watermark they cant stay they get pulled). But to even bring the "dancing baby" to light like Prince did, is heartless IMHO. He should of just left it alone or told his lawyers to back off( HE CAN DO THIS), but he didnt he persued a innocent mother and child for something petty NOW he is trying to make claim that "Creep" is HIS song! IT NOT HIS SONG! Its Radioheads Period! Sounds like you need to get your facts straight! [Edited 6/12/08 5:12am] from what I'm learning here factually speaking Creep's copyright of the song is different than Prince's performance and interpretation of the song, which I don't believe Creep has rights over unless it is going to be officially sold. The issue at hand is the unauthorized recording and free broadcasting of a performance on a website--youtube. in terms of the dancing baby, he did not go after her specifically as you pointed out. he probably instructed his lawyers to remove anything with his music in it. she was the one who fought back with a lawsuit that is going to set a precedent....You're right, he should have laid off. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
wonder505 said: toots said: Its the parents decision not YOURS if they want to have the video on the net of their kids.Prince CAN be behind the lawyers and the one with say so if he really didnt want that lawsuit he did have the right to stop the video or lawyers to even persue it right? I know plenty of parents that put videos/pictures up of their kids doing silly things (we do it on the org all the time) and gross things for that matter( Prince pulled all his pictures off the net at one point unless they have a watermark they cant stay they get pulled). But to even bring the "dancing baby" to light like Prince did, is heartless IMHO. He should of just left it alone or told his lawyers to back off( HE CAN DO THIS), but he didnt he persued a innocent mother and child for something petty NOW he is trying to make claim that "Creep" is HIS song! IT NOT HIS SONG! Its Radioheads Period! Sounds like you need to get your facts straight! [Edited 6/12/08 5:12am] from what I'm learning here factually speaking Creep's copyright of the song is different than Prince's performance and interpretation of the song, which I don't believe Creep has rights over unless it is going to be officially sold. The issue at hand is the unauthorized recording and free broadcasting of a performance on a website--youtube. in terms of the dancing baby, he did not go after her specifically as you pointed out. he probably instructed his lawyers to remove anything with his music in it. she was the one who fought back with a lawsuit that is going to set a precedent....You're right, he should have laid off. It was a cover regardless from what I understand and even IF it is different,he also blocked the actual song Creep on youtube by Radiohead> One of Radio head members (cant remember who sorry) even expressed to have Prince "unblock" THEIR song from youtube (evendently Radiohead has no problem with youtube and keeping their song on the site but P has a problem with youtube). You cant claim rights to a COVER of someones song! That would be like me trying to lay claim to When Doves Cry for doing a cover on it(even doing it remotely different) Im still doing a cover of HIS song! Edited to say:IMHO, sounds like Prince dont have any trouble covering other artists songs BUT when one of Prince's songs get covered he has quite the baby fit and yanks any type of cover or version of it off the net! IMHO what a  (baby)!Especially if the music is playing in the background like "the dancing baby" story!
(Not yelling the caps are expressing the words sorry) [Edited 6/12/08 5:37am] Smurf theme song-seriously how many fucking "La Las" can u fit into a dam song
Proud Wendy and Lisa Fancy Lesbian asskisser | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
toots said: It was a cover regardless from what I understand and even IF it is different,he also blocked the actual song Creep on youtube by Radiohead> One of Radio head members (cant remember who sorry) even expressed to have Prince "unblock" THEIR song from youtube (evendently Radiohead has no problem with youtube and keeping their song on the site but P has a problem with youtube). You cant claim rights to a COVER of someones song! That would be like me trying to lay claim to When Doves Cry for doing a cover on it(even doing it remotely different) Im still doing a cover of HIS song! (Not yelling the caps are expressing the words sorry) well if that is that is the case then why don't Radiohead get the song unblocked. If they have complete rights and control over Prince's performance of the song? [Edited 6/12/08 5:42am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
wonder505 said: toots said: It was a cover regardless from what I understand and even IF it is different,he also blocked the actual song Creep on youtube by Radiohead> One of Radio head members (cant remember who sorry) even expressed to have Prince "unblock" THEIR song from youtube (evendently Radiohead has no problem with youtube and keeping their song on the site but P has a problem with youtube). You cant claim rights to a COVER of someones song! That would be like me trying to lay claim to When Doves Cry for doing a cover on it(even doing it remotely different) Im still doing a cover of HIS song! (Not yelling the caps are expressing the words sorry) well if that is that is the case then why don't Radiohead get the song unblocked. If they have complete rights and control over the song? They are trying to! The video would be on one day then pulled the next(I check from time to time and its on some days then not on others) Its a ongoing battle and Prince either way is being a (insert unkind word here). Smurf theme song-seriously how many fucking "La Las" can u fit into a dam song
Proud Wendy and Lisa Fancy Lesbian asskisser | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
toots said: wonder505 said: well if that is that is the case then why don't Radiohead get the song unblocked. If they have complete rights and control over the song? They are trying to! The video would be on one day then pulled the next(I check from time to time and its on some days then not on others) Its a ongoing battle and Prince either way is being a (insert unkind word here). okay maybe i'm missing something here, but all Radiohead did was issue a statement saying he should unblock the video. They have not exercised their legal right over Prince's performance. I have not heard them say or do anything else on the matter. The videos you see here and there are from other people. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
wonder505 said: toots said: They are trying to! The video would be on one day then pulled the next(I check from time to time and its on some days then not on others) Its a ongoing battle and Prince either way is being a (insert unkind word here). okay maybe i'm missing something here, but all Radiohead did was issue a statement saying he should unblock the video. They have not exercised their legal right over Prince's performance. I have not heard them say or do anything else on the matter. The videos you see here and there are from other people. Your not missing anything I havent heard anything either. All I know is that the video( Radioheads and/or Prince) is there one day and gone the next then reappears soon after its all screwy IMHO. Ill just wait like everyone else and see what ensues with this matter. [Edited 6/12/08 5:56am] Smurf theme song-seriously how many fucking "La Las" can u fit into a dam song
Proud Wendy and Lisa Fancy Lesbian asskisser | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FREE CREEP | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said: Anxiety said: my guess is that typically, coachella would own the footage since it was from their festival.
i'm also guessing that as part of the terms of prince's appearance at the festival, he demanded full control of any recorded footage of his performance, thereby making footage from that part of the festival more or less his footage. and i'd also wager that if we lived on bizarro world and prince were the kind of person who WOULD post his performance of the song and radiohead were anti-youtube, they could come in and say "we don't want our music on you tube" and if they got really nasty about it, then prince could only at best post a muted version of the clip? all conjecture, mind you.  Actually, if it was from a camera phone, the venue can't claim the copyright for the material. Its not theirs to claim. Copyrights belong to the AUTHOR. Whoever shot the footage owns it. They are not allowed to make money off of it without Prince signing a release form but the venue, Prince nor anyone else has legal rights over the video footage. If that were possible, magazines like the Star and the Inquirer would be out of business because celebrities would claim ownership of all of those bad photos just because they are in them. It doesn't work that way. Sure, he owns the performance, but the video footage of the performance is NOT his since he didn't film it. Photography and videography is just as valid of an art as any other form is and you can't claim the work of a videographer without a "work for hire" copyright claim. Whoever shot it, owns it and has the right to say if it goes up or not. Here's something fun to do; Somebody post the VIDEO from the performance with Radiohead's audio under it. There's a quandry for Prince's ass. 
[Edited 6/5/08 8:57am] I'm pretty sure that most concerts either state on the ticket or on signs entering the venue, that they do not allow recording of the performance. I would imagine that in walking into the venue, you are inadvertently agreeing to these terms... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
which clip would tht b then?
there were dozens & i guess most people saw them b4 they were banished 2 you tube dungeon! 'sshoooobbbeeeedooo!'  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think all this is brilliant and exactly what Prince is after. On numerous other websites there are comments being left that Prince is no longer relevant. Yet on those same sites, the same people are bemoaning him for his "antics" with regard to youtube etc... Therefore, surely he is still relevant... maybe his music isn't to the fore (or completely silenced  ) but his "weird" ways are still newsworthy.
I think the main problem is now, that "celebrities" enjoy their status much more and since these "celebrities" are the girl or boy next door with no talent, people identify with them and their behaviour. Prince maintains that mystique and his actions are classed as "odd". He has always had the same attitude... that early interview where he commanded his band not to answer any questions... the interview in 1995 (?) where he wore his NPG mask and whispered to Mayte so she could give the answers... It is part of his magic and why a lot of people respect him... he does things his own way and it seems to play to his advantage in the long run. Someone mentioned earlier on here that it does state on (most) tickets that the recording or taking photos of an event is prohibited. If the artists don't particularly mind that's their problem. I seem to recall at the O2, the majority of people actually respected Prince's wishes and refrained from taking photos... and those who didn't were soon reminded of the position of the exits should they continue... And as for the Creep video... if there is, as rumored, a Coachella DVD coming, don't you think a few more people may buy it to see what all the fuss is about? And I'm sure the quality of it will be a great deal better than Mr.Samsung's Tinypix version... We ain't from Hollywood, so you know it's all good | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
and...
Radiohead don't play "Creep" anymore because of how they were commercially exploited (Or some other "weirdness"! ) by it's success... So why would they care if Prince chose to block it or not...
Many other artists have covered it too, simply because Radiohead don't play it and are (supposedly) THE festival band... I think Prince's version was sung about the Coachella audience and therefore he changed the lyrics... "What do you do when I'm not around?" "You're so very special" etc etc... Maybe I'm just spouting nonsense cos it's late...  We ain't from Hollywood, so you know it's all good | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
New topic Printable This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.