SuperSoulFighter said:

I think we're caught in some semi-legal zone here... Even if a site is not actually selling bootlegs, then still, fans coming to this site saying "this particular cd is really good" is as much as an advert. I think Prince sees it this way and I really can't blame him for it. And it surely won't stop me from seeing his shows. Because that will give me another bootleg to buy!Like Timmy said, don't be surprised that the man is a control freak

It's probably against the law for Prince to exert control over a website that is not competing with him for profits over his releases or work. If they had the money, these sites could take him to court to try to issue a cease and desist to Prince against making threats to them. Maybe they could try to get agressive and sue for damages if they proved that they lost something of value to them and the public when Prince allegedly (illegally?) bullied them into shutting down.

ufoclub said:

SuperSoulFighter said:

I think we're caught in some semi-legal zone here... Even if a site is not actually selling bootlegs, then still, fans coming to this site saying "this particular cd is really good" is as much as an advert. I think Prince sees it this way and I really can't blame him for it. And it surely won't stop me from seeing his shows. Because that will give me another bootleg to buy!Like Timmy said, don't be surprised that the man is a control freak

It's probably against the law for Prince to exert control over a website that is not competing with him for profits over his releases or work. If they had the money, these sites could take him to court to try to issue a cease and desist to Prince against making threats to them. Maybe they could try to get agressive and sue for damages if they proved that they lost something of value to them and the public when Prince allegedly (illegally?) bullied them into shutting down.

Perhaps send Prince a cease and desist order?

If Prince was such a so-called "control freak," none of these unreleased songs or videos would have ever been available. There wouldn't be hundreds of outtakes in circulation. There would be no audience recordings of concerts, audio or video. All of that would have always been prevented, thus "controlled" beforehand, not weakly "ceased" after he obtusely allowed the material to get ripped and exported in the first place. So stop giving this man that strong title of "control freak." True, powerful and shrewd creators of art in the music business never let their garbage leak.

purplethunder3121 said:

ufoclub said:

It's probably against the law for Prince to exert control over a website that is not competing with him for profits over his releases or work. If they had the money, these sites could take him to court to try to issue a cease and desist to Prince against making threats to them. Maybe they could try to get agressive and sue for damages if they proved that they lost something of value to them and the public when Prince allegedly (illegally?) bullied them into shutting down.

Perhaps send Prince a cease and desist order?

Right, but that needs to come from a lawyer! and they are expensive.

SuperSoulFighter said:

I think we're caught in some semi-legal zone here... Even if a site is not actually selling bootlegs, then still, fans coming to this site saying "this particular cd is really good" is as much as an advert. I think Prince sees it this way and I really can't blame him for it. And it surely won't stop me from seeing his shows. Because that will give me another bootleg to buy!Like Timmy said, don't be surprised that the man is a control freak

Absolutely, as I mentioned on the other thread. If you have a site that displays his image on a bootleg cd for example, then that leads to discussion of the music on that cd, ( which is Prince's music), then does that not invite, encourage, entice fans frequenting that site and commenting on those cds, to seek that bootleg material, whether for free or for a fee? What you're doing is 'advertising' that a bootleg of his music material exists and using his image without his permission to advertise that bootleg material. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Example, let's say if you took a designer bag, and made an imitation of it, and displayed it on your site, and visitors of your site are interested in the 'imitation' of that designer bag, discussing how it looks exactly like an original, and are told those imitations exist, it's more than likely some will want to know where to get it. Would that not be a violation on behalf of the original designer of that bag? So isn't providing info about existing bootlegs of a musician's music material be considered a violation as well?

[Edited 9/1/12 12:25pm]

ufoclub said:

purplethunder3121 said:

Perhaps send Prince a cease and desist order?

Right, but that needs to come from a lawyer! and they are expensive.

I don't know how much IP/copyright lawyers charge, but I doubt it compares to the amount of money I've spent on Prince-related stuff in the last couple of years.

As I said on another fan site, if they decide to put the site back up, it might be a good investment to pay a lawyer to review the site BEFORE it goes live. A lawyer might be able to insert certain disclaimers and set guidelines that could keep Prince's lawyers away. And if Prince's lawyers come back, they would certainly be surprised to get a response to the cease-and-desist letter from the lawyer who helped with the redesign of the site. You need to get a lawyer involved in the beginning to lay the groundwork for the response. Unfortunately nothing comes for free, unless you can get a lawyer to do this pro bono, which is unlikely.

NeonCraxx said:

And I found out about The Digital Garden website just a few seconds ago, so that explains why I should care or know the situation.

I don't feel attacked as fan. Period.

Very good point I did not know anything about TDG either until this post but people on this site discuss bootleges. You are free to communicate via your e-mail with anyone about boots as well as obtaining them if you like.

Really P is within his rights to stop bootlegging however, the chances of that happening completly are impossible. As long as we all now how to get a hold of them who cares what he does.

It will not stop me from going to a concert since I need to go to shows to decide if I want to check out the bootleg latter.

the orig. poster Tittypants is right,

Prince only cares about himself and his $$$$$$$,

he cares shit about his fans.

IF he cared he would open that vault, releasing dvd's, remasters etc......

make us all happy with great music from the past,

That. is. Never gonna happen before he is gone and dead,

and, most of us are gone and dead too, most likely in 2039 - or something....

until then.. nothing happens. Damn, what a shame.

2elijah said:

SuperSoulFighter said:

I think we're caught in some semi-legal zone here... Even if a site is not actually selling bootlegs, then still, fans coming to this site saying "this particular cd is really good" is as much as an advert. I think Prince sees it this way and I really can't blame him for it. And it surely won't stop me from seeing his shows. Because that will give me another bootleg to buy!Like Timmy said, don't be surprised that the man is a control freak

Absolutely, as I mentioned on the other thread. If you have a site that displays his image on a bootleg cd for example, then that leads to discussion of the music on that cd, ( which is Prince's music), then does that not invite, encourage, entice fans frequenting that site and commenting on those cds, to seek that bootleg material, whether for free or for a fee? What you're doing is 'advertising' that a bootleg of his music material exists and using his image without his permission to advertise that bootleg material. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Example, let's say if you took a designer bag, and made an imitation of it, and displayed it on your site, and visitors of your site are interested in the 'imitation' of that designer bag, discussing how it looks exactly like an original, and are told those imitations exist, it's more than likely some will want to know where to get it. Would that not be a violation on behalf of the original designer of that bag? So isn't providing info about existing bootlegs of a musician's music material be considered a violation as well?

[Edited 9/1/12 12:25pm]

It's interesting that most of the criticism of the TDG website is coming from people who never or rarely visited it. There's no evidence that whoever created the TDG website was actually creating bootlegs. Second, there's a difference between promotion and criticism. If I describe a bootleg of a concert and say that the sound quality of the bootleg is poor and the concert is not as good as another one from the same tour, is that also illegal? If I say this particular bootleg is of poor quality but a better one exists, is that illegal? The designer bag analogy doesn't exactly work because there is no official release to compare to the bootlegs.

The key question going forward is what this means for prince.org. Do the rules need to be tightened to conform with the new demands made of TDG? Or is Ben willing to fight for the site again if Prince's lawyers come calling? Frankly, if I were him I would probably pull the plug and say it's not worth the trouble.

[Edited 9/1/12 12:41pm]

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

Absolutely, as I mentioned on the other thread. If you have a site that displays his image on a bootleg cd for example, then that leads to discussion of the music on that cd, ( which is Prince's music), then does that not invite, encourage, entice fans frequenting that site and commenting on those cds, to seek that bootleg material, whether for free or for a fee? What you're doing is 'advertising' that a bootleg of his music material exists and using his image without his permission to advertise that bootleg material. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Example, let's say if you took a designer bag, and made an imitation of it, and displayed it on your site, and visitors of your site are interested in the 'imitation' of that designer bag, discussing how it looks exactly like an original, and are told those imitations exist, it's more than likely some will want to know where to get it. Would that not be a violation on behalf of the original designer of that bag? So isn't providing info about existing bootlegs of a musician's music material be considered a violation as well?

[Edited 9/1/12 12:25pm]

It's interesting that most of the criticism of the TDG website is coming from people who never or rarely visited it. There's no evidence that whoever created the TDG website was actually creating bootlegs. Second, there's a difference between promotion and criticism. If I describe a bootleg of a concert and say that the sound quality of the bootleg is poor and the concert is not as good as another one from the same tour, is that also illegal? If I say this particular bootleg is of poor quality but a better one exists, is that illegal? The designer bag analogy doesn't exactly work because there is no official release to compare to the bootlegs.

The key question going forward is what this means for prince.org. Do the rules need to be tightened to conform with the new demands made of TDG? Or is Ben willing to fight for the site again if Prince's lawyers come calling? Frankly, if I were him I would probably pull the plug and say it's not worth the trouble.

[Edited 9/1/12 12:41pm]

I certainly hope it never comes to that...

thedance said:

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

Absolutely, as I mentioned on the other thread. If you have a site that displays his image on a bootleg cd for example, then that leads to discussion of the music on that cd, ( which is Prince's music), then does that not invite, encourage, entice fans frequenting that site and commenting on those cds, to seek that bootleg material, whether for free or for a fee? What you're doing is 'advertising' that a bootleg of his music material exists and using his image without his permission to advertise that bootleg material. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Example, let's say if you took a designer bag, and made an imitation of it, and displayed it on your site, and visitors of your site are interested in the 'imitation' of that designer bag, discussing how it looks exactly like an original, and are told those imitations exist, it's more than likely some will want to know where to get it. Would that not be a violation on behalf of the original designer of that bag? So isn't providing info about existing bootlegs of a musician's music material be considered a violation as well?

[Edited 9/1/12 12:25pm]

It's interesting that most of the criticism of the TDG website is coming from people who never or rarely visited it. There's no evidence that whoever created the TDG website was actually creating bootlegs. Second, there's a difference between promotion and criticism. If I describe a bootleg of a concert and say that the sound quality of the bootleg is poor and the concert is not as good as another one from the same tour, is that also illegal? If I say this particular bootleg is of poor quality but a better one exists, is that illegal? The designer bag analogy doesn't exactly work because there is no official release to compare to the bootlegs.

The key question going forward is what this means for prince.org. Do the rules need to be tightened to conform with the new demands made of TDG? Or is Ben willing to fight for the site again if Prince's lawyers come calling? Frankly, if I were him I would probably pull the plug and say it's not worth the trouble.

[Edited 9/1/12 12:41pm]

I find your first comment sort of a double-standard and questionable because you often criticize, b*tch, whine and moan endlessly, about Prince shows that you have never attended.

Nowhere is it mentioned in my post that I stated the site owners of TDG created those illegal bootlegs. That has never been mentioned. I specifically stated that I never saw their site, and stated 'if' they were displaying info on existing bootlegs, then that may or could have been seen, as a possible form of advertisement, even if that wasn't the site owner(s)' intention(s).

Point is, having that info publically available, of course would lead to discussions and interest from visitors/Prince fans of the site, and many seeking those illegal bootlegs for their own self interest. No one said that was the site owner's intentions, even if they catalogued it for the love of Prince's music, but the point is, the musician whose bootlegged music was catalogued on that site, may not have seen it that way. He may have seen it as a form of advertising and supplying information on 'existing illegal bootlegs'. That's the point I'm making.

Try to take your time to fully read a post before jumping to respond. If you don't agree, hey that's fine, but at least have your sh*t in order before throwing pebbles. No love lost. Carry on.

[Edited 9/1/12 13:31pm]

NeonCraxx said:

thedance said:

the orig. poster Tittypants is right,

Prince only cares about himself and his $$$$$$$,

he cares shit about his fans.

IF he cared he would open that vault, releasing dvd's, remasters etc......

make us all happy with great music from the past,

That. is. Never gonna happen before he is gone and dead,

and, most of us are gone and dead too, most likely in 2039 - or something....

until then.. nothing happens. Damn, what a shame.

So in order for him to care about his fans, he needs to release things that you want? I thought you were delusional but you've really outdone yourself.

This is what I mean when I say Prince fans are whiney and have a sense of entitlement.

Some people actually believe he owes them something.

Like he's obligated to open his vault, release dvd's, remasters, etc.

2elijah said:

electricberet said:

It's interesting that most of the criticism of the TDG website is coming from people who never or rarely visited it. There's no evidence that whoever created the TDG website was actually creating bootlegs. Second, there's a difference between promotion and criticism. If I describe a bootleg of a concert and say that the sound quality of the bootleg is poor and the concert is not as good as another one from the same tour, is that also illegal? If I say this particular bootleg is of poor quality but a better one exists, is that illegal? The designer bag analogy doesn't exactly work because there is no official release to compare to the bootlegs.

The key question going forward is what this means for prince.org. Do the rules need to be tightened to conform with the new demands made of TDG? Or is Ben willing to fight for the site again if Prince's lawyers come calling? Frankly, if I were him I would probably pull the plug and say it's not worth the trouble.

[Edited 9/1/12 12:41pm]

I find your first comment sort of a double-standard and questionable because you often criticize, b*tch, whine and moan endlessly, about Prince shows that you have never attended.

Nowhere is it mentioned in my post that I stated the site owners of TDG created those illegal bootlegs. That has never been mentioned. I specifically stated that I never saw their site, and stated 'if' they were displaying info on existing bootlegs, then that may or could have been seen, as a possible form of advertisement, even if that wasn't the site owner(s)' intention(s).

Point is, having that info publically available, of course would lead to discussions and interest from visitors of the site,, and many seeking those illegal bootlegs for their own self interest. No one said that was the site owner's intentions, even if they catalogued it for the love of the music, but the point is, the musician whose bootlegged music was catalogued on that site, may not see it that way. He may have seen it as a form of advertising and information on 'existing bootlegs'. That's the point I'm making.

Try to take your time to fully read a post before jumping to respond. If you don't agree, hey that's fine, but at least have your sh*t in order before throwing pebbles. No love lost. Carry on.

In your analogy, the same person who made the imitation of the designer bag also displayed it on his site. That's what I was referring to. As for bitching about shows I never attended, the show I bitch about the most is the Dallas concert, and the reason I didn't attend it is that it was cancelled. A lot of people jumped into that discussion who didn't have tickets or any plans to attend. What's your point?

[Edited 9/1/12 13:34pm]

Interestingly, this site now throws up a false positive on the whole Malware Iframe-V (courtesy of Google) end of things. Oh wait, it's gone now that I've typed that. Weird.

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

I find your first comment sort of a double-standard and questionable because you often criticize, b*tch, whine and moan endlessly, about Prince shows that you have never attended.

Nowhere is it mentioned in my post that I stated the site owners of TDG created those illegal bootlegs. That has never been mentioned. I specifically stated that I never saw their site, and stated 'if' they were displaying info on existing bootlegs, then that may or could have been seen, as a possible form of advertisement, even if that wasn't the site owner(s)' intention(s).

Point is, having that info publically available, of course would lead to discussions and interest from visitors of the site,, and many seeking those illegal bootlegs for their own self interest. No one said that was the site owner's intentions, even if they catalogued it for the love of the music, but the point is, the musician whose bootlegged music was catalogued on that site, may not see it that way. He may have seen it as a form of advertising and information on 'existing bootlegs'. That's the point I'm making.

Try to take your time to fully read a post before jumping to respond. If you don't agree, hey that's fine, but at least have your sh*t in order before throwing pebbles. No love lost. Carry on.

In your analogy, the same person who made the imitation of the designer bag also displayed it on his site. That's what I was referring to.

Well then that would be seen as illegally copying a designer bag, with the designer's name on it, especially if you attach a designer's name on it and pass it off as an original. (the designer label being on the fake merchandise is the only thing I left out in that earlier post). If you sold fake designer bags on NYC streets, with that designer's name on it, then you risk the chance of getting arrested and your merchandise confiscated.

So in comparison, if you display a bootleg cd/DVD/live show with Prince's music/live performances on it on your site, and there is an image of him attached to it, with the possibility it can create interest/buzz to fans who frequent/visit said site, and want to gain access in obtaining those bootlegs, whether free or for a fee, do you not see display of that information can be seen as some form of 'advertisement?' Even if your intention was just to catalogue that bootleg for informational purposes only? Even for 'informational' purposes, it is possible it could be seen as some form of advertisement, because of the fact that it is bootleg information. The fact that you're cataloguing illegal bootlegs of a musician's music material, in which you are aware, that said artist doesn't approve approve of that type of act with his music material, should ring an alarm in the first place. That is my point.

.

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

I find your first comment sort of a double-standard and questionable because you often criticize, b*tch, whine and moan endlessly, about Prince shows that you have never attended.

Nowhere is it mentioned in my post that I stated the site owners of TDG created those illegal bootlegs. That has never been mentioned. I specifically stated that I never saw their site, and stated 'if' they were displaying info on existing bootlegs, then that may or could have been seen, as a possible form of advertisement, even if that wasn't the site owner(s)' intention(s).

Point is, having that info publically available, of course would lead to discussions and interest from visitors of the site,, and many seeking those illegal bootlegs for their own self interest. No one said that was the site owner's intentions, even if they catalogued it for the love of the music, but the point is, the musician whose bootlegged music was catalogued on that site, may not see it that way. He may have seen it as a form of advertising and information on 'existing bootlegs'. That's the point I'm making.

Try to take your time to fully read a post before jumping to respond. If you don't agree, hey that's fine, but at least have your sh*t in order before throwing pebbles. No love lost. Carry on.

In your analogy, the same person who made the imitation of the designer bag also displayed it on his site. That's what I was referring to. As for bitching about shows I never attended, the show I bitch about the most is the Dallas concert, and the reason I didn't attend it is that it was cancelled. A lot of people jumped into that discussion who didn't have tickets or any plans to attend. What's your point?

[Edited 9/1/12 13:34pm]

My point in reference to your comment about those who never visited the TDG site, but have an opinion on it, is no different than you commenting on concerts you've never attended, and yes you do and have commented on concerts you've never attended. That was my point, but since that's not what the topic of this thread is about, and even though I took a moment to remind you of that, in all due respect that is what this thread is about, so we'll just have to discuss that at another time, and get back on topic.

2elijah said:

electricberet said:

In your analogy, the same person who made the imitation of the designer bag also displayed it on his site. That's what I was referring to. As for bitching about shows I never attended, the show I bitch about the most is the Dallas concert, and the reason I didn't attend it is that it was cancelled. A lot of people jumped into that discussion who didn't have tickets or any plans to attend. What's your point?

[Edited 9/1/12 13:34pm]

My point in reference to your comment about those who never visited the TDG site, but have an opinion on it, is no different than you commenting on concerts you've never attended, and yes you do and have commented on concerts you've never attended. That was my point, but since that's not what the topic of this thread is about, and even though I took a moment to remind you of that, in all due respect that is what this thread is about, so we'll just have to discuss that at another time, and get back on topic.

I may be guilty of making snarky comments about concerts I haven't attended. But nothing I say will prevent you or anyone else from attending any Prince concert. The action of Prince's lawyers, on the other hand, means that no one can go to the TDG website now. The resource is gone, and it may be too late to do anything about it. My concern is with what happens next. You won't have to look through many threads in PM&M to find one discussing a bootleg, and even encouraging fans to seek it out. And you can look at practically any thread and find people using images of Prince, which is another thing the lawyers objected to according to the TDG website. All those cute photo threads could be grounds for a cease-and-desist letter. I hope that will not happen, but if the shutting down of TDG is met with a collective shrug among the fans, the lawyers may decide to come after prince.org next.

Tittypants said:

Yup, I made a thread over a year ago [called something similar] about this, & I'm no longer softening the blow of my personal feelings..... Fuck Prince! This dude is one of the biggest [little] drama queens ever. So, until he starts caring about fans/supporters, I will no longer support his music. I'm strictly free downloading anything he releases in the future, & I hope bootleggers run even more rampant all over his shit. He's all about $ [& has terrible business sense @ that, hence his paranoia], so there's no reason for me to spend my hard earned $ anymore...

I feel that we should all ignore him actually. People should stop going to his shows too, if you ask me, just to bring him back down to Earth. If it wasn't for the cool people on this site, I really don't think I'd come here @ all. I'm a big fan of his music, but his ego tripping really makes me lose a lot of respect for him. It also makes it a lot harder for me to even take him serious anymore....

Sure, I could have kept these thoughts to myself, & I'm sure there are many of you who will disagree & call me names & shit [feel free.....This is Prince.org, & won't be the first time I've been called anything on this site ]. I just had to get that out...

Sorry bud, that's not going to happen...ever.

Thousands of people outside of this and other websites, don't visit the Org or other messageboards and don't care about this. Others are like me, I have my own life and my own problems and I don't get caught up in Prince, a stranger to me, over his business deals or control issues over websites. Ofcourse like all of us we may have an opinion about his personality being this or that and the issue over control of bootlegs, discussions of bootlegs and images make for a good debate, but all I want to hear is music and have a good time and I gather from his Concert attendance records lots of other folks do also and just don't care about his personality, moreso his musical persona.

[Edited 9/1/12 15:19pm]

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

My point in reference to your comment about those who never visited the TDG site, but have an opinion on it, is no different than you commenting on concerts you've never attended, and yes you do and have commented on concerts you've never attended. That was my point, but since that's not what the topic of this thread is about, and even though I took a moment to remind you of that, in all due respect that is what this thread is about, so we'll just have to discuss that at another time, and get back on topic.

I may be guilty of making snarky comments about concerts I haven't attended. But nothing I say will prevent you or anyone else from attending any Prince concert. The action of Prince's lawyers, on the other hand, means that no one can go to the TDG website now. The resource is gone, and it may be too late to do anything about it. My concern is with what happens next. You won't have to look through many threads in PM&M to find one discussing a bootleg, and even encouraging fans to seek it out. And you can look at practically any thread and find people using images of Prince, which is another thing the lawyers objected to according to the TDG website. All those cute photo threads could be grounds for a cease-and-desist letter. I hope that will not happen, but if the shutting down of TDG is met with a collective shrug among the fans, the lawyers may decide to come after prince.org next.

Well, you're right. Your opinions/comments can never prevent fans from attending his concerts. He does have a multitude of fans who never visit/frequent unofficial sites, outside of this site, so he'll always have fans, regardless of opinions on this site from fans. He gains new fans every year, young and old, regardless.

Like I said, on this thread and the other, I never knew that TDG site existed. If his lawyers got involved, then neither you, I or anyone else other than the ones the papers were served to, know the full story behind why their site had to shut down.

You only heard one side of the story. I actually think Prince has been pretty calm with the org in terms of what's posted here. and seems to tolerate a lot of stuff he could have taken action on, but he didn't, despite some of the comments/accusations/nasty and negative comments, a handful of orgers, have said or say about him.

For the most part, the positive fans on this site, outweigh the negative fans in my opinion. Even if this site was gone tomorrow, it won't be the end of Prince's career or fan base, because the Org doesn't define all of Prince's fan base nor does the Org, have any control of his music career or future as a musician. It certainly will never put an end to his music career. Regardless of his views on the internet, there's many social media sites that would or will be happy to report his upcoming shows/music anyway.

[Edited 9/1/12 15:20pm]

electricberet said:

2elijah said:

My point in reference to your comment about those who never visited the TDG site, but have an opinion on it, is no different than you commenting on concerts you've never attended, and yes you do and have commented on concerts you've never attended. That was my point, but since that's not what the topic of this thread is about, and even though I took a moment to remind you of that, in all due respect that is what this thread is about, so we'll just have to discuss that at another time, and get back on topic.

I may be guilty of making snarky comments about concerts I haven't attended. But nothing I say will prevent you or anyone else from attending any Prince concert. The action of Prince's lawyers, on the other hand, means that no one can go to the TDG website now. The resource is gone, and it may be too late to do anything about it. My concern is with what happens next. You won't have to look through many threads in PM&M to find one discussing a bootleg, and even encouraging fans to seek it out. And you can look at practically any thread and find people using images of Prince, which is another thing the lawyers objected to according to the TDG website. All those cute photo threads could be grounds for a cease-and-desist letter. I hope that will not happen, but if the shutting down of TDG is met with a collective shrug among the fans, the lawyers may decide to come after prince.org next.

Beret, take my advice and don't even try to argue pros and cons with minions that even had no clue of the importance or existence of the TG. It's pointless, honestly!

stop being a dingleberry

Tittypants said:

I feel that we should all ignore him actually. People should stop going to his shows too, if you ask me, just to bring him back down to Earth.

OzlemUcucu said:

electricberet said:

I may be guilty of making snarky comments about concerts I haven't attended. But nothing I say will prevent you or anyone else from attending any Prince concert. The action of Prince's lawyers, on the other hand, means that no one can go to the TDG website now. The resource is gone, and it may be too late to do anything about it. My concern is with what happens next. You won't have to look through many threads in PM&M to find one discussing a bootleg, and even encouraging fans to seek it out. And you can look at practically any thread and find people using images of Prince, which is another thing the lawyers objected to according to the TDG website. All those cute photo threads could be grounds for a cease-and-desist letter. I hope that will not happen, but if the shutting down of TDG is met with a collective shrug among the fans, the lawyers may decide to come after prince.org next.

Beret, take my advice and don't even try to argue pros and cons with minions that even had no clue of the importance or existence of the TG. It's pointless, honestly!

Well, I take some satisfaction in the fact that this thread and the other TDG thread have been competing for the top spot in PM&M all day long. I don't think Prince's management wanted this to be the leading topic of conversation on prince.org today as opposed to his Chicago concerts. But, then again, what do I know?

electricberet said:

OzlemUcucu said:

Beret, take my advice and don't even try to argue pros and cons with minions that even had no clue of the importance or existence of the TG. It's pointless, honestly!

Well, I take some satisfaction in the fact that this thread and the other TDG thread have been competing for the top spot in PM&M all day long. I don't think Prince's management wanted this to be the leading topic of conversation on prince.org today as opposed to his Chicago concerts. But, then again, what do I know?

You jokin... right?

electricberet said:

OzlemUcucu said:

Beret, take my advice and don't even try to argue pros and cons with minions that even had no clue of the importance or existence of the TG. It's pointless, honestly!

Well, I take some satisfaction in the fact that this thread and the other TDG thread have been competing for the top spot in PM&M all day long. I don't think Prince's management wanted this to be the leading topic of conversation on prince.org today as opposed to his Chicago concerts. But, then again, what do I know?

I know of your good intention, it is not gone unnoticed and you are doing very well by standing on your opinion, that is important to you. People with different opinions have to learn to back off sometimes instead of insulting people that have an opinion on something!!!!

rdhull said:

electricberet said:

Well, I take some satisfaction in the fact that this thread and the other TDG thread have been competing for the top spot in PM&M all day long. I don't think Prince's management wanted this to be the leading topic of conversation on prince.org today as opposed to his Chicago concerts. But, then again, what do I know?

You jokin... right?

Well, nobody seems to be speculating and in anticipation of the IL gig. Shame that he continues with the touring, we'd hoped he was working on a new album.....shame...shame...he's fading in the galaxies...he's no longer under my radar...that's all my eyes can see...

rdhull said:

stop being a dingleberry

Tittypants said:

Just think about it though...if that happened, just for him to see some errors of his ways, I think he'd have to pay attention then . I'm not sure totally sure why remasters haven't happened, nor is it about bootlegs as to why I feel the way I feel. I just think Prince's ego tripping is really getting in the way of his legacy. He's made some damn good music, but his control issues/religious beliefs/his "holier than thou" attitude is ruining everything imo.....