I am not a musician...although it is easy for me to see, how this whole internet thing...is going to hurt music and musicians all together.

When a new band comes out with their first album and a handful of people buy the cd...maybe it goes out through the world via internet...and these musicians don't make any money to get their careers going.

The world of music is lucky that Prince is in the position to lose money because of this behavior...and at the same time...save the music industry by working on these laws.
The music of tomorrow will have Prince to thank when it comes right down to it.
And if u don't believe a non-musician..."You got another Judas Priest thing commin'"

luv4u said:

After all is said and done. It may be a baby child that changed the purple reign.

meow85 said:

He needed that attitiude reajustment, and a reality check, maybe now things will go back to the way they were. He needs to learn that GOD is not tattoed on his Ass

pplrain said:

See that's the major difference with this case;

You want to use his music for a fashion show; probably people will pay to see it and you probably will use entire songs.

This woman didn't have any commercial intent let alone had any commercial benefit from posting a mere 29 second clip with his music playing in the background.

The case therefore most likely looks like it's fair use, which is why the judge let the case go forward.

Those who claim that Prince/Universal should have the right to take down these kind of videos are either ignorant or just don't get it. Fair use is an EXTREMELY important copyright limitation. Without it you wouldn't have been allowed to use much of his and other people's work. Legally this ruling is therefore a great recognition of consumer's user rights, something some of you really need to learn about and value more than you are showing here.

And let's ask you fans of his royal badness' behind how many copies you made of Prince's music for your friends in your life? None huh? Oh you angels...

The judge ruled that this case will go forward to answer the original complaint that Universal/Prince ABUSED its copyright by ignoring fair use and taking the video down.

That's a different question and more difficult to answer, but the two issues also blend together. If the judge rules that this was such a clear cut matter of fair use that Universal/Prince should have considered it before taking it down, he could also conclude that because they didn't consider at all and had it taken down anyway, they abused their copyright. But I doubt that he is willing to go there.


--
[Edited 8/29/08 8:44am]

I love it. Nuff said.

Ifsixwuz9 said:

wHEN ALL TTHIS STARTED AND THE WHOLE PFUNK THING WAS THE LAST STAW FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE. hE SHOULD HAVE STOOD UP AND EXPLAINED HIS POSITION, THAT MAYBE WHY THE WHOL 3121 LINE GOT TRASHED . hE SHOULD HAVE NOT USED THE pfUNK THING AS AN ANSWER MADE HIM LOOOK LIKE A BULLY AND A JERK

VelvetJ said:

Tame said:

DIY, indie musicians can make a much better living selling their own albums. You're right about how the industry has changed. It's not gonna be about the price of a song anymore. These days it's about touring, other performances, merchandise, and building a loyal fanbase who will support you for years to come. This ain't your daddy's industry anymore, that's for sure. The good thing about this, the focus is more on the art than the money. And those packaged artists will fall in favor of true musicians who don't mind making nothing more than a decent living doing what they love doing, making art for others to appreciate.

dolorespark said:

HAHAHAHHAHA

Yeah, sure..

dolorespark said:

"and a little child shall lead them"

So this means those damn P.F.U. idiots can take there hand icon and slap themselves in the face!!!!! True old school fans didn't join the little crybaby group!!! Atleast THIS one didn't!!!! F.U.-P.F.U.

I understand, today, why the Judge made the first decision in seeing the power Prince owns. Few men are so free. Understanding his position as Judge, he will consider the law or forfeit himself.

I believe the Judge and I think alike in knowing of 'good faith'. If the woman wants her child to be seen on the internet, then it shouldn't matter if there is music to the background or not. However, if she is wanting to show the world her child with the conjured spirit we call Prince behind him, she is acting in "bad faith". There are parents who teach their children to dance to their own music and I believe this woman shouldn't sell herself and/or her legacy so short.

I hope the woman buys her son a guitar and let's him go crazy, now that might be worth seeing on the net....OK!
[Edited 9/22/08 3:28am]

meow85 said:

he really has no choice, if you don't defend your intellectual property rights, you risk losing them.

DesireeNevermind said:

"Universal Music Corp., which owns the rights to the song, ordered YouTube to remove the video and nearly 200 others involving Prince compositions."

I don't remember anywhere in the posting where it said that Prince ordered the videos removed. He doesn't even own the rights to these old songs.... remember the Slave incident?

Wish ppl would stop blaming Prince everytime someone's posting of a Prince song is removed. I think Universal Music Corp. is in the wrong for this one. I hope ya'll don't make Prince the scapegoat for this one too!

Tame said:

IMO Prince is fighting a losing battle! The internet will be around a lot longer than he will, and try as he might, it's one thing Prince can't control!
[Edited 9/15/08 20:58pm]

alandail said:

Bullshit. Stop spreading lies.

Takieaa said:

That's not "love". That's famdom of the worst kind.

There is a law and it doesn't say a copyright owner can do whatever he please. One may not abuse their copyright and according to the judge in this case one should consider fair use before claiming people committed a crime and stiffling their constitutional right to free speech. The law is there for all of us, not just the princey's of this world. Deal with it.

I hadn't heard of this until now. Mixed feelings here-on the one hand-seems like it'd be flaterring to have his song used on the other hand, it IS his creation and if he doesn't want them using it, so be it.
I don't know what to say really.

Tremolina said:

My point is Prince, and every Artist, should have the right to have their creations shown as they choose, and with the internet it is time for new laws because this is a new medium. I live it, you deal with it.

Don't hate because I love Prince and realize what love is, and don't nobody love you. I love Haters too, just not the same way. I know by Prince's good works he is a product of Christ and I LOVE (and agree) with all God's children.

Don't hate, participate.



n the wordz of Nelson (the Simpsons) Ah Hah!
[Edited 9/17/08 2:53am]

Takieaa said:

And my point is that they don't.


Copyright law has already been adapted to the internet.


No you don't. You keep claiming he is in his rights when he is not.




I don't "hate". Don't use such big words.


Dont' be so judgemental with people you don't know and keep your hypocritical "christ talk" for you please. Christ wouldn't even support copyright. Typical.

paisley43 said:

What's up with this slave mentality of you folks?

The entire point of this case is that a copyright owner can NOT prohibit ANY use of his work without considering fair use.

Tremolina said:[quote]

Takieaa said:

He said give to Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar and give to God what belongs to God.

I don't care to argue with you. Let's see what the Judge's final word is 'cause right now u keep saying Prince doesn't have the right and from what I heard the video ain't on the internet, so...

Tremolina said:

My post had NOTHING to do at all with what your claiming. It is my opinion only and I'm entitled to it just as anyone else here. Your not making any sense with
the "slave mentality" thing.

Prince, all artists, copyright holders etc. should push the limits of what they thinks is fair, the courts will decide what is and what isn’t fair.

Of course everyone here wants free shit, its no skin of your nose, its for those that own or worked for that something that need to worry about these issues

People have no sense of what something is worth, …..raise taxes a few cents to fix your streets and people are up in arms, spill your Big Gulp on a pothole and your up in arms. So heaven forbid you have to pay for someones work that keeps you entertained on the internet

Whatever.

After TWO mind boggling Bush victories, I couldn’t possibly underestimate the intelligence of the American public,…..vice President Palin, lol, if it comes to that, it will be funny at least.
[Edited 9/19/08 18:10pm]

Takieaa said:

And Ceasar has a law on FAIR USE which prince, as the law abiding citizen and ceasar respecting christian he is, should obey.

Deal with it.

paisley43 said:

Well when you say "if he doesn't want them using it, so be it" it sounds pretty much like whatever master prince says or wants is law.

The point is that it's not.

violetblues said:

this is not about "free shit" but about free SPEECH.
nobody is going to get a free copy of let's go crazy from a 29 second snippet of background music.

thegreatestromance said:

i hope somebody comes to take your avatar and username away

ain't no one crying
abuse of Fair Use should be criminal
this is a free speech/press issue
not to be taken lightly
it's your 1st Amendment right

Snap said:

who cares about the 1st amendmend when all you hope and pray for is that prince will notice your "support" on this site and make you his new wife?

I am telling you, people are much too willing to forsake their basic rights for the sake of nothing but a lie.
[Edited 9/23/08 9:55am]

Snap said:

lol, so just your rights matter right? not the artists, work witch is the subject here.
I'm not saying the dancin baby isnt free speech, which it is, but that was not what artist are fighting about, the dancin baby was simply a great way for business like YouTube to exploit their agenda, nothing more and nothing less.


Like i mentioned previously, we are coming into uncharted territory here with the proliferation of the net, and laws have to be made perfectly clear as to what is and isn’t acceptable, and artists should fight for their rights also. it has nothing to do with free speech, it’s a bout commerce.
And in the end business will do quite well I think, and artists will get the shaft yet again.

When people mention the dancing baby as a victory for free speech, I cant help but laugh along side with the ones that want to exploit artist work,….suckers!
Quick look at the sparkly lights! Aren’t they pretty!
[Edited 9/23/08 13:31pm]