mynameisnotsusan said:

Mars23 said:

All this speculation is just that; meaningless speculation. Clearly this artist does not understand MJ. There is a winged naked baby on the cover and Michael is not molesting it. Symbol or not, the cover is not accurate.

Come on. That is low. Edit that shit.

According to what I'm hearing, they did edit it. The symbol is no longer on the cover.

DaphneLovesPR1NCE said:

Thank goodness the symbol was removed!! That is Prince's symbol and does NOT belong on a MJ album cover. I love MJ and can't wait for this cd...but that was too much. Prince didn't give permission and doubt he would have. It doesn't make any sense, the artist sucks for doing that! Trying to provoke Prince...If other artist had been included, then I wouldn't be upset, but sense there wasn't any other artists, I find it completely disrespectful to Prince. Either way, its gone!

I have to ask... weren't you banned a while back?

Get Londell McMuffin on the phone!! Oh...he's represented both of them.

Money Don't Matter 2 Night Ya'll. I can only wait to see the effect on Prince's concerts:

"Sue Your Body(Down To The Ground)."

SomewhereHereOnEarth said:

that bubble near the tiger looks soooooooooo depressing...

like somethings missing...

mm something is definitely missing. but i'm sure the screeching sound i heard when i read "no permission granted!" will fill that space just nicely.

now we can all hear that exclamation mark that mister funkberry so kindly pointed out.

because these are the things that really matter most

i can think of other things i'd rather listen to, though. noize dont do it for me.

squirrelgrease said:

How about this for a (conspiracy) theory.

And this might make sense, being how hard it is to market a new CD these days.

Perhaps some marketing genius at the record label decided to do a semi-publicity stunt here. By adding the Prince symbol, they knew someone would discover it and pick up on it. That would be enough to cause a small commotion amongst Prince fans (which it did).

Now, knowing (or assuming) that a lot of Prince fans are also MJ fans, this little stunt would bring attention to the fact that a new MJ record will be released soon. Everyone knows that awareness of an album's release is the first step in marketing the album.

The symbol was never intended to be on the album. But it was all a stunt to garner a little attention towards the album. Now that it has, they can (and did) remove the symbol without getting sued and more people that were not aware of an impending release are now aware. (including Prince's camp)

Am I wrong for considering this scenario as a possibility? People are sneaky these days, and they have to be with the music industry as flaky as it is.

squirrelgrease said:

This is weird, I just blew up the new bubble image and I think there may be more trouble on the horizon...

[img:$uid]http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac268/squirrelgrease2009/CloseUp.jpg[/img:$uid]

aiden said:

I can not believe he got it removed... I thought that was the coolest thing ever.... Damn! Will include the "Symbol version" in my iTunes artwork. Hope somebody got a high res copy before it was removed... [Edited 11/5/10 23:46pm]

I snatched it up when a hi res version was released

jtfolden said:

DaphneLovesPR1NCE said:

Thank goodness the symbol was removed!! That is Prince's symbol and does NOT belong on a MJ album cover. I love MJ and can't wait for this cd...but that was too much. Prince didn't give permission and doubt he would have. It doesn't make any sense, the artist sucks for doing that! Trying to provoke Prince...If other artist had been included, then I wouldn't be upset, but sense there wasn't any other artists, I find it completely disrespectful to Prince. Either way, its gone!

I have to ask... weren't you banned a while back?

For inciting Homophobic hatred I believe, mods I thought you banned her, not give her a warning.

Huggiebear said:

jtfolden said:

I have to ask... weren't you banned a while back?

For inciting Homophobic hatred I believe, mods I thought you banned her, not give her a warning.

What? I thought Daphne and TheDance were IN a homosexual relationship! Masturbating together to 'Call My Name' and stuff.

squirrelgrease said:

mynameisnotsusan said:

The Beatles had to get permission and if you notice on the album cover there is a space where someone didn't give it to them. From wiki

The collage created legal worries for EMI's legal department, which had to contact the people who were still living to obtain their permission. Mae West initially refused — famously asking "What would I be doing in a lonely hearts club?" — but she relented after The Beatles sent her a personal letter. Actor Leo Gorcey requested payment for inclusion on the cover, so his image was removed. An image of Mohandas Gandhi was also removed at the request of EMI (it was airbrushed out), who had a branch in India and were fearful that it might cause offence there. Lennon had asked to include images of Jesus Christ and Adolf Hitler, though neither was included through fear of causing offence.

Speaking of Sgt Pepper, Common had a sort of modern equivalent with Electric Circus. I don't remember Prince's "official response" to that cover.

[img:$uid]http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac268/squirrelgrease2009/common-electric-circus.jpg[/img:$uid]

I think his official response was to actually appear om the Album.

ps. Great Album ....Buy it and enjoy

I would like to hear a statement from the painter himself, Kadir Nelson. Apparently the painting was done in 2009. It would be cool to see the original painting and to see if the symbol is in fact on there or not!?

And why do I have a feeling of having seen this artwork before? Did I see it in one of the MJ documentaries/interviews? Or was that just a painting similar to the present one!? I think I saw it in one of those documentaries where they follow MJ shopping and interviews him at Neverland...!?

Oh youtube, here we go...

geo4you said:

I would like to hear a statement from the painter himself, Kadir Nelson. Apparently the painting was done in 2009. It would be cool to see the original painting and to see if the symbol is in fact on there or not!?

And why do I have a feeling of having seen this artwork before? Did I see it in one of the MJ documentaries/interviews? Or was that just a painting similar to the present one!? I think I saw it in one of those documentaries where they follow MJ shopping and interviews him at Neverland...!?

Oh youtube, here we go...

it's really similar to some of the paintings Michael commissioned but this is a new one

IF the is removed from MJ... then fine !! I want MJ (his camp) to leave Prince alone.....

That's the only right decission - remooving this.....

Pentacle said:

What? I thought Daphne and TheDance were IN a homosexual relationship!

^ Hi pentacle. My sexlife is none of your business.

btw................ I have always thought Daphne is female...

[Edited 11/6/10 1:55am]

berniejobs said:

How about this for a (conspiracy) theory.

And this might make sense, being how hard it is to market a new CD these days.

Perhaps some marketing genius at the record label decided to do a semi-publicity stunt here. By adding the Prince symbol, they knew someone would discover it and pick up on it. That would be enough to cause a small commotion amongst Prince fans (which it did).

Now, knowing (or assuming) that a lot of Prince fans are also MJ fans, this little stunt would bring attention to the fact that a new MJ record will be released soon. Everyone knows that awareness of an album's release is the first step in marketing the album.

The symbol was never intended to be on the album. But it was all a stunt to garner a little attention towards the album. Now that it has, they can (and did) remove the symbol without getting sued and more people that were not aware of an impending release are now aware. (including Prince's camp)

Am I wrong for considering this scenario as a possibility? People are sneaky these days, and they have to be with the music industry as flaky as it is.

And then of course it would become an instant collector's item, like the Butcher Block album.

Mars23 said:

Much to the Sony people for removing the symbol......

Hopefully, there will be no angry backlash turned against Prince - among MJ fans - and others, like the one we saw back in 1985... after the USA for Africa incident, almost the whole world was suddenly against Prince back then.

The question is why the symbol was there on the MJ cover in the first place.

Mystery......

^ 13 secs clip..... thanks to koko, lifted from gaffa.dk...

its not a michael jackson record. its a sony music and jackson estate record.

not sure i'd feel comfortable taking part in "the exploitation of dead michael jackson" if i were prince.

maybe that never crossed his mind and its a simple rights issue and he's protecting his creative altruism.

its yet another instance of a painter and a recording company thinking they can do what they like with someone else's work/trademark.

sony is doing it with michaels music, and the painter and sony did it with prince's symbol.

i dont see how it really matters much anyway. prince is probably happy being the butterfly on michaels shoulder, its a lot bigger than that small symbol in a bubble, and we all know... life is too short to be small. hehe.

< oops. am i allowed to use that emoticon? or should i go for this one instead? >

squirrelgrease said:

In any event, there should be at least one thread about this in Prince: Music And More. This really is about Prince and his symbol now.

Mods, please no locky.

Yes! I never understood why the first one got locked anyway.

Really strange that Sony would make such a mistake.

Nice to get a response from Prince camp too!

squirrelgrease said:

This is weird, I just blew up the new bubble image and I think there may be more trouble on the horizon...

[img:$uid]http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac268/squirrelgrease2009/CloseUp.jpg[/img:$uid]

I'm hoping it's a lenticular cover and the only thing that moves is lil Princey's winky.

thedance said:

^ 13 secs clip..... thanks to koko, lifted from gaffa.dk...

Yet again, the "Prince won" video is posted.....

Rorywan said:

Mars23 said:

All this speculation is just that; meaningless speculation. Clearly this artist does not understand MJ. There is a winged naked baby on the cover and Michael is not molesting it. Symbol or not, the cover is not accurate.

That's pretty disgraceful talk from a mod. I don't really give a ---- one way or another about this MJ album or the prince symbol, but that's just plain juvenile and idiotic coming from someone who is supposed to set a standard of behaviour on a forum like this. Not impressed Mars, not impressed. Not funny, not clever, just ill informed.

I agree completely Rorywan.

Mars23 said:

All this speculation is just that; meaningless speculation. Clearly this artist does not understand MJ. There is a winged naked baby on the cover and Michael is not molesting it. Symbol or not, the cover is not accurate.

You're just a loser.

^ no name calling..

why not trying to ignorre?

mynameisnotsusan said:

Mars23 said:

All this speculation is just that; meaningless speculation. Clearly this artist does not understand MJ. There is a winged naked baby on the cover and Michael is not molesting it. Symbol or not, the cover is not accurate.

Come on. That is low. Edit that shit.

You know what's even lower.... A middle aged man sleeping in the same bed as little boys, giving them wine, and showing them pornography.

Removing the symbol is petty, no one would've noticed had it not been for beady-eyed fans. They weren't trying to use the symbol to imply Prince had something to do with the record (as if that would pull in any punters any way).

NouveauDance said:

mynameisnotsusan said:

Come on. That is low. Edit that shit.

You know what's even lower.... A middle aged man sleeping in the same bed as little boys, giving them wine, and showing them pornography.

No No U can't say that...that did not happen, MJ is dead now and the world needs a musical Icon for some people to make a few bucks off!! tut tut, everybody knows people will not splash the cash on an unsavory!

Nouveau Dance.

I'm presuming you've read all the official court documentation on line for the public, and the criminal history and character of the accusers right? You also know the father of the child committed suicide, last year (I think it was 2009), it was after MJ's death anyway.And how that father treated his own son? Please let me know if you've read them.

Paedofiles don't just molest selectively, it's a sickness where everyone is prey. Why did other kids spend time with MJ and were never touched?

I'm not saying Michael's thoughts on the matter were normal. MJ's problem was that he himself was an absolute child. But that's also psychologically understandable because he never had a childhood.