SilverlakePhil said:

He looks like Tony M - White Version. Before you know it, Prince will be having him rapping on his albums...

I wonder if he will, as a gesture of goodwill or something, not that it is his song. Anyhow, he should.

Thom Yorke is calling him out for acting like a whining little bitch. 'Bout time someone did it.

I hope Thom Yorke never hears this tragic cover version

this video retarded and so is that guy.

SilverlakePhil said:

LleeLlee said:

It's funny, I was wondering what Radiohead thought of Prince's cover and the fact that the video can't be shown since they seem to support Youtube. Well know I know I guess.

I think Prince should lay off blocking songs that are not his or songs he collaborated with, but as a good gesture I think he should unblock it.
[Edited 5/30/08 8:31am]

This should be interesting. If an artist does a live cover of another artist's song can the person doing the cover have his rendition removed from the net or does the original writer of the song retain the right of what to do with live covers of their songs.

I love this band! Fuck Prince. Fuck Prince up his stupid asshole.

Free the music, indeed.

Ifsixwuz9 said:

I thought about that! Prince is annoying with his moves, but ya gotta admit, its causing interesting debate and the rules are written as we go along in uncharted territory.

Ifsixwuz9 said:

the videos were shot by fans=unauthorised

plus, if Prince is the performer

he can pull it off the net, if he wants to

Yeeeah, ok. This dude had a little too much time on his hands.

wonder505 said:

viewaskew said:

What's the big deal? You like Radiohead ... then go listen to their version of the song. Problem solved.

Orange123 said:

That's was my thinking too. Not seeing what the big deal is. People who like Radiohead can go find them doing a live version of the song.

Thats mfing amazing. How do you block a song that isn't yours? P has balls if nothing else, thats for sure!

Love2tha9s said:

The issue is not about the song, it's about his live performance of the song recorded illegally and then posted on the net.

Ifsixwuz9 said:

pretty much, but i think what annoys people

is that Prince still feels the need to control this stuff.

its just not necessary, it really isnt.

Ifsixwuz9 said:

No, the issue is about claiming a copyright violation - which is what he did.

Prince can not claim copyright over a song that was not writen by him simply because he performed it and someone recorded it.

Radiohead should threaten to sue him for playing and recording (since he also recorded it) their song - which he did not have permission to do.

The rules that he is so anal about should apply to him as well.

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.

JustErin said:[quote]

Ifsixwuz9 said:

You cannot sue someone for covering your song live or recording it, and I am quite sure if Prince were to put the performance up anywhere or in a DVD, Radiohead would be compensated and permissions would have been granted (or denied) before official release.

viewaskew said:

If we didn't think before that you were Kevin Smith himself, we do now.

(for the uninformed, he just quoted (sorta) a Kevin Smith movie...except for it being about Prince, lol)

Prince shouldn't do coverz anywayz.

sexxydancer said:

This might stop him from doing them now. I know I won't miss them.

SilverlakePhil said:

That nigga needs to sit his sorry ass down. Nothing like ignorant motherfuckers man.

purplecam said:

He has more than enough of his own great material that goez untouched that he could b per4ming rather than resort 2 coverz.

sexxydancer said:

I totally agree with you and that right there would prevent stuff like this from happening. Problem solved.

Is this really worth getting your knickers in a twist? I bet P ain't running around like a headless chicken like some of y'all are.

Militant said:

nah. kevin smith would have more class. even though his movies are crass, he seems to have at least a tenuous grasp on tact as a public figure.

Anji said:

it's just people posting on a message board.

no need to twist your knickers over untwisted knickers.

viewaskew said:

Untwisted knickers, indeed.

JustErin said:

Well if he said he claims copyright over the music and lyrics that's one thing but if the footage was pulled because it was live footage of Prince recorded illegally and posted on the net then I think that somethng entirely different.

Like Anx said either Coachella owns the footage or P bought his perfornce, or had it written in the appearance contract that his footage would be owned by him. If it's any of these instances Radiohead has no say in the matter.

.
[Edited 5/30/08 9:58am]