As i have said before Prince has no control over the WB stuff, WB has pulled alot of their artists, including a-Ha, just noticed this when researching for a "Fanmade" video for "Soft Rains of APril" an album cut from their second album, done as a tribute to them, well usually when you do this, the label can just remove the music, the label has even removed their images in this video. So think again people who "think prince is the almighty and can make things go away with a wave of a wand, or threat of a lawsuit", if a-ha is getting taken down (and they encourage things like youtube and others) than WB can really do a number on most of its artists.

It's true. When you're a signed artist on a big label like WB, you don't control nothing. Especially not your music.

I knew that after a few months thinking Prince really had that power...but truth is Prince probably don't even mind. Warner Bros. do tho.

Ok...then explain why does he take off the non WB stuff?

GraffitiKid said:

that is in his control but i have seen very recently videos like Chelsea Rodgers, Guitar live on tv in england which i have never seen anywhere, all the tv appearances for Lotus package, and some other things. He pulls down concert stuff which honestly if i was a recording artist i would pull down that shit that people shoot with their camera phones that they cant hold straight and terrrible sound, if that were me that stuff would be gone in a second, if its pro-shot i say leave it. But owned stuff depends on the artist, some are more easy to deal with it, in working in my indie films and theater work when i have used music of a-ha the band have let me do what i want no questions only restricting sales or advertising them as being part of a production that tickets are sold for, but they have only told me that the WB stuff cannot be used in films distributed, unless re-recorded or live.

GraffitiKid said:

Probably because that's how he makes his money. If he doesn't control his music and videos availability then he'll eventually go broke from the bootlegging of that material. It's not like he has a record label to keep an eye on these things anymore. There's even a flaw in the concept of his downloads from the Lotusflow3r site. I downloaded my copies on my computer but was able to download them onto a friends computer as well after logging in. I could've given the music to anybody I chose to without paying for each download. After 7 times I would have passed the cost of buying physical CDs. Everything after that would in effect be free.

Timmy84 said:

Yeah i mean he has the pull of his "owned" stuff, thats mainly everything Emancipation and on, with the exception of any WB releases tucked in there. With his other stuff he can do what he wants, but for the older stuff, WB has a big time say, literally all the say and all the power. Prince's power with WB is the re-issues, re-packaging, re-selling of his music. Example they cant do another "best of" without his consent.

It really isn't right how labels have so much control of an artists music. They made the music...they should have total control of it

GraffitiKid said:

Yeah well its a shame but how it always was for the most part, there were some back in the day that did little things to fight for some things, but it was really tough back then to just say "i want to own this" but some do own their stuff and rights, very few.

On that topic sort of I heard a story about Harry Chapin who signed with Elektra back in 1972 for a 9 album deal for eight years, he turned down one label that offered more, took less to go with Elektra/Boardwalk but part of his deal was that not one cent would come from his money to record the albums, which is unheard of especially back then, you paid for your own record to be recorded out of your advances, but he somehow got them to foot the bill by just taking less to sign.

A lot of Madonna's stuff is also missing from youtube.

It's pathetic to try and defend his greedy ass at this point. He cries about WB and the way they treated him yet will act just like them

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Yeah he did have YouTube take down the fan videos and his version of "Creep" lol

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

its really a defense of him, its more showing that he doesnt have the power over WB stuff that people think he does, WB has ripped down alot of stuff besides Prince.

As far as the ownership thing it goes both ways, i mean we all preach here about dont sign with a label, which is all fine and a great idea, but if you are on your own and say a website is allowing your stuff to be downloaded for free, now your the one that is not getting paid, do you just let it all go and screw it, or do you have it taken down, i mean as an indie artist you cant afford to lose a dime.

lastdecember said:

Indie artist?

Prince is a MULTI MILLIONAIRE.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

No im speaking about being an indie artist, not of Prince, what would someone who was running their own thing be expected to do if there stuff was turning up everywhere. With Prince i think we really over estimate his wealth, i know we think that 1992 125million dollar deal was what he got, but he gave back most of it to get out of his deal, so hes got cash but not nearly what we think hes got.

Bishop31 said:

Then, that explains the word "Slave" written over the side of his face.

why is this ish stinking up the music: non-prince forum? wait, let me see if I can muster my mod-powers to move this crap.

[moved from music: non-prince to prince: music and more-sos]


nope, nothing.

sosgemini said:

it was pulled back to being about Prince, but it was a point about WB pulling many other artists off YouTube,

I've noticed that on some youtube vids of many artists, that their vids have been pulled from youtube because the record labels are the ones that demand their artists' work be pulled off there.
[Edited 2/18/10 11:14am]

lastdecember said:

Prince has made his feelings quite clear over the years. He is against fan uploads, fan art and fan tributes in general. And more than anything he wants to be respected (show me the money!) as an equal partner with the corporations seeking to financially exploit his music. His stance is understandable though I believe it has cost him a whole generation of fans. I don't know why you feel the need to make stuff up and say he's not pulling vids down when he's spoken very publicly about doing exactly that.

Ummmm...



Warner Bros doesn't own NPG Records, or the copyrights.

^ Right, and a few years back it used to be copyright claims from Universal Music Group iirc.

My guess: because "3121" the album was released there (Universal)??
[Edited 2/18/10 2:38am]

Prince can pull himself off quite nicely thank you very much

citrus said:

He is a bit of a wanker, isn't he?

MacDaddy said:

HonestMan13 said:

That's news to me. I didn't know Prince had a site where you could watch a ton of official videos, live videos, fan-made videos and had to pay for those things.

HonestMan13 said:

Dude, he can't even be arsed to KEEP THINGS IN PRINT.

HonestMan13 said:

Yeah, so he PAYS some idiotic company like Web Sheriff to do that.

Timmy84 said:

Which company was mentioned on the takedown notice of the recent rehearsal vids? NPG Records. Since when is that a WB company?

GraffitiKid said:

So who should control The Time's recordings?

It's really simple: WB paid Prince for those recordings. Also, he kept renewing his contract. He is a grown-up who made decisions.

BartVanHemelen said:

Well that's different, I mean if he SELLS the rights to anyone then it's not his anymore.
[Edited 2/18/10 8:30am]