independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince's Lawyers' Papers
« Previous topic  Next topic »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 08/31/12 9:07pm

berniejobs

avatar

Prince's Lawyers' Papers

I feel bad for the sites that have received noticed from Prince's lawyers.

But I suppose there is a bright side to everything. As a hardcore fan, it's probably a cool little collector's item to receive a letter from his lawyers. You know, it's only one degree of separation from Prince himself!

As a matter of fact, I think I am going to start a fan site right now, filled with videos and free downloads of his music, just so I can get one of those nifty little collector's items.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 08/31/12 9:10pm

electricberet

avatar

I've had that same thought myself. Whoever is running The Digital Garden website might be able to fund their legal defense by auctioning off the cease and desist letters on eBay. I'd certainly put in a bid.

It reminds me of Mike D.'s comment when the Beastie Boys were sued for sampling Beatles songs: "What's cooler than getting sued by the Beatles?”

The Census Bureau estimates that there are 2,518 American Indians and Alaska Natives currently living in the city of Long Beach.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 08/31/12 9:13pm

berniejobs

avatar

electricberet said:

I've had that same thought myself. Whoever is running The Digital Garden website might be able to fund their legal defense by auctioning off the cease and desist letters on eBay. I'd certainly put in a bid.

It reminds me of Mike D.'s comment when the Beastie Boys were sued for sampling Beatles songs: "What's cooler than getting sued by the Beatles?”


Good point! I mean, I'd wish no harm to Prince or his legacy, but wouldn't it even be cooler if you had to go to court for it and got to meet Prince in the actual courtroom?

Sike. I'm not a pscyho-fan like that, just saying.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 08/31/12 9:15pm

electricberet

avatar

berniejobs said:

electricberet said:

I've had that same thought myself. Whoever is running The Digital Garden website might be able to fund their legal defense by auctioning off the cease and desist letters on eBay. I'd certainly put in a bid.

It reminds me of Mike D.'s comment when the Beastie Boys were sued for sampling Beatles songs: "What's cooler than getting sued by the Beatles?”


Good point! I mean, I'd wish no harm to Prince or his legacy, but wouldn't it even be cooler if you had to go to court for it and got to meet Prince in the actual courtroom?

Sike. I'm not a pscyho-fan like that, just saying.

The problem is that there's a lot of work involved in setting up and running a website, and you can't be sure that you will be rewarded with a cease-and-desist letter.

The Census Bureau estimates that there are 2,518 American Indians and Alaska Natives currently living in the city of Long Beach.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 08/31/12 9:21pm

berniejobs

avatar

electricberet said:

berniejobs said:


Good point! I mean, I'd wish no harm to Prince or his legacy, but wouldn't it even be cooler if you had to go to court for it and got to meet Prince in the actual courtroom?

Sike. I'm not a pscyho-fan like that, just saying.

The problem is that there's a lot of work involved in setting up and running a website, and you can't be sure that you will be rewarded with a cease-and-desist letter.

True. But I bet if you straight up put his studio albums on there for free download it wouldn't take long...

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 08/31/12 9:27pm

purplethunder3
121

avatar

Kudos to Ben for standing up against bully threats all these years! woot!

"Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything." --Plato

https://youtu.be/CVwv9LZMah0
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 08/31/12 9:51pm

FunkySideEffec
ts

avatar

U guys are funny lol
pray Peace in the House of Prince.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 09/01/12 7:02am

Bohemian67

avatar

FunkySideEffects said:

U guys are funny lol

I second that.... cool

If you love Prince and you

Just can't resist....

Set up a site....

For a cease and desist

Cheers to Ben too for his will power.

"Free URself, B the best that U can B, 3rd Apartment from the Sun, nothing left to fear" Prince Rogers Nelson - Forever in my Life -
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 09/01/12 8:38am

djThunderfunk

avatar

berniejobs said:

electricberet said:

I've had that same thought myself. Whoever is running The Digital Garden website might be able to fund their legal defense by auctioning off the cease and desist letters on eBay. I'd certainly put in a bid.

It reminds me of Mike D.'s comment when the Beastie Boys were sued for sampling Beatles songs: "What's cooler than getting sued by the Beatles?”


Good point! I mean, I'd wish no harm to Prince or his legacy, but wouldn't it even be cooler if you had to go to court for it and got to meet Prince in the actual courtroom?

Sike. I'm not a pscyho-fan like that, just saying.

Pretty sure you'd just meet his lawyers... wink

[Edited 9/1/12 8:59am]

Liberty > Authority
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 09/01/12 8:51am

electricberet

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

berniejobs said:


Good point! I mean, I'd wish no harm to Prince or his legacy, but wouldn't it even be cooler if you had to go to court for it and got to meet Prince in the actual courtroom?

Sike. I'm not a pscyho-fan like that, just saying.

Pretty sure you'd just me his lawyers... wink

Or maybe not. He didn't even respond to the perfume lawsuit, which is why the judge accepted their version of the facts.

The Census Bureau estimates that there are 2,518 American Indians and Alaska Natives currently living in the city of Long Beach.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 09/01/12 9:42am

NouveauDance

avatar

The only infringment a discussion or discography site (even a bootleg one) really makes is using copyright images, because they're not hosting or even linking to the bootlegs themselves. Of course hardcore fans who dedicate their own time and money to strengthen the fanbase and promote their favourite artists' work don't have an angry team of scary lawyers, making their position in effect defenceless.

Petty.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 09/01/12 9:45am

djThunderfunk

avatar

NouveauDance said:

The only infringment a discussion or discography site (even a bootleg one) really makes is using copyright images, because they're not hosting or even linking to the bootlegs themselves. Of course hardcore fans who dedicate their own time and money to strengthen the fanbase and promote their favourite artists' work don't have an angry team of scary lawyers, making their position in effect defenceless.

Petty.

yeahthat

Liberty > Authority
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 09/01/12 10:01am

NeonCraxx

avatar

purplethunder3121 said:

Kudos to Ben for standing up against bully threats all these years! woot!

Weird how he could "stand up" to "bully threats" but he can't update his own fucking website.

[Edited 9/1/12 10:01am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 09/01/12 5:21pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

All I got was a few harassing emails and youtube messages! Nothing in writing.

here is a redacted copy and paste:

A Message From NPG

WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEE ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi

On behalf of Paisley Park and NPG, we would kindly ask you to immediately remove your {VIDEO} from YouTube.

Should you fail to do so, we shall - regrettably - be obliged to have your clip removed and, moreover, secure your banning from YouTube, together with your contact details in order that our clients' attorneys may pursue you in relation to this libellous video. Naturally, however, we trust that this shall not prove to be necessary and, as such, we hope you shall avail yourself of this opportunity to mitigate.

Many thanks in advance for respecting our clients' wishes,

As you will appreciate, this e-mail - containing, as it does, a position that is potentially prejudicial to our clients' open / formal position - is written on a without prejudice basis and, as such, all of our said clients' accumulated, worldwide rights and remedies remain strictly reserved : please excuse this required formality. Similarly, we would remind you that this e-mail / comunication is copyright and that all publication and communication to any third party (other than, of course, your attorneys) is strictly prohibited and actionable against you : again, please excuse this formality.

Yours,

WEB SHERIFF

[Edited 9/1/12 17:24pm]

Message #2

WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEES ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi Again ,

Thanks for your PM ... .. although we should point-out that that video clearly states that PRINCE "steals" (ergo that he is a thief) and this, like-it-or-not, is highly defamatory / libellous ... .. you are, of course, entitled to insult anyone you please (again within the bounds of libel laws), but the above crosses-the-line (and then some).

The reason why we chose to write to you is that you clearly 'had-a-beef' and we wished to communicate with you directly to demonstrate you that there are two sides to this story. Should you wish for us to remove the clip and then take further action, then that's up-to-you, we were / are simply offering you the opportunity to withdraw the clip (again, the choice is entirely yours).

We'll look forward to liaising further.

Regards,

WEB SHERIFF

Message #3

WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEES ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi Again

Thanks for the further PM ... .. although nothing rhetorical about your statement that PRINCE is thief !!

We'll assume that you now want us to crack-on with Plan B ... .. but please don't say that we didn't try to reason with you first.

Anyway, such is life (sometimes !!).

Regards,

WEB SHERIF

what i like the most is the warning that it is illegal for me to publish the messages! Sorry you can not enforce that after the fact. My work email attaches something like that too. Now I could lose my job I guess if I violate it but it is not a legally binding statement as there was never any opportunity to refuse the communication.

[Edited 9/1/12 17:32pm]

"Keep on shilling for Big Pharm!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 09/01/12 5:41pm

electricberet

avatar

^^^ That's what I mean. You might get a C&D email like that for putting up some unauthorized stuff, but if you really want a fancy letter signed by lawyers, suitable for framing, you'll have to be more creative like the TDG guys.

The Census Bureau estimates that there are 2,518 American Indians and Alaska Natives currently living in the city of Long Beach.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 09/01/12 5:49pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

electricberet said:

^^^ That's what I mean. You might get a C&D email like that for putting up some unauthorized stuff, but if you really want a fancy letter signed by lawyers, suitable for framing, you'll have to be more creative like the TDG guys.

I was calling prince a jerk and I isted a few songs he did not write that he claimed as his own.

The worst it got was an email from youtube saying a request for my personal information had been made. I replied with my full name and address and I send it to the web sheriff too. I was hoping to get a letter....

[Edited 9/1/12 17:51pm]

"Keep on shilling for Big Pharm!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 09/01/12 6:37pm

FunkySideEffec
ts

avatar

I wonder what it will take to get a letter from Prince himself, and not his suits.

How about hiring a football stadium & projecting all his videos onto the main big screen & inviting anybody and everybody for a free showing.
Or how about we order one billion helium balloons (purple ones of course) each with a cd, picture, dvd or song lyrics attached to them, then every Prince fan around the world releases them simultaneously on an auspicious day, which they will ultimately pop thus creating genuine purple rain falling onto earth and into the hands of every boy & girl.
This will surely get Skipper out to play with us, no?
pray Peace in the House of Prince.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 09/01/12 6:53pm

kiasheri

avatar

FunkySideEffects said:

I wonder what it will take to get a letter from Prince himself, and not his suits. How about hiring a football stadium & projecting all his videos onto the main big screen & inviting anybody and everybody for a free showing. Or how about we order one billion helium balloons (purple ones of course) each with a cd, picture, dvd or song lyrics attached to them, then every Prince fan around the world releases them simultaneously on an auspicious day, which they will ultimately pop thus creating genuine purple rain falling onto earth and into the hands of every boy & girl. This will surely get Skipper out to play with us, no?

lol lol lol lol lol

I want everybody 2 make it in2 PARADISE!!!!!!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 09/01/12 9:03pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

what i like the most is the warning that it is illegal for me to publish the messages! Sorry you can not enforce that after the fact. My work email attaches something like that too. Now I could lose my job I guess if I violate it but it is not a legally binding statement as there was never any opportunity to refuse the communication.

What I like the most is that you ignored the warning! Thank you posting. Love it!!

cool

Liberty > Authority
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 09/02/12 12:28am

artist76

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

All I got was a few harassing emails and youtube messages! Nothing in writing.



here is a redacted copy and paste:



A Message From NPG


WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEE ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi

On behalf of Paisley Park and NPG, we would kindly ask you to immediately remove your {VIDEO} from YouTube.

Should you fail to do so, we shall - regrettably - be obliged to have your clip removed and, moreover, secure your banning from YouTube, together with your contact details in order that our clients' attorneys may pursue you in relation to this libellous video. Naturally, however, we trust that this shall not prove to be necessary and, as such, we hope you shall avail yourself of this opportunity to mitigate.

Many thanks in advance for respecting our clients' wishes,

As you will appreciate, this e-mail - containing, as it does, a position that is potentially prejudicial to our clients' open / formal position - is written on a without prejudice basis and, as such, all of our said clients' accumulated, worldwide rights and remedies remain strictly reserved : please excuse this required formality. Similarly, we would remind you that this e-mail / comunication is copyright and that all publication and communication to any third party (other than, of course, your attorneys) is strictly prohibited and actionable against you : again, please excuse this formality.

Yours,

WEB SHERIFF

[Edited 9/1/12 17:24pm]



Message #2



WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEES ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi Again ,

Thanks for your PM ... .. although we should point-out that that video clearly states that PRINCE "steals" (ergo that he is a thief) and this, like-it-or-not, is highly defamatory / libellous ... .. you are, of course, entitled to insult anyone you please (again within the bounds of libel laws), but the above crosses-the-line (and then some).

The reason why we chose to write to you is that you clearly 'had-a-beef' and we wished to communicate with you directly to demonstrate you that there are two sides to this story. Should you wish for us to remove the clip and then take further action, then that's up-to-you, we were / are simply offering you the opportunity to withdraw the clip (again, the choice is entirely yours).

We'll look forward to liaising further.

Regards,

WEB SHERIFF




Message #3



WEB SHERIFF
Protecting Your Rights on the Internet
Tel 44-(0)208-323 8013 / Fax 44-(0)208-323 8080
websheriff@websheriff.com www.websheriff.com

STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ATTENTION ADDRESSEES ONLY
COPYRIGHT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
& WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Hi Again

Thanks for the further PM ... .. although nothing rhetorical about your statement that PRINCE is thief !!

We'll assume that you now want us to crack-on with Plan B ... .. but please don't say that we didn't try to reason with you first.

Anyway, such is life (sometimes !!).

Regards,

WEB SHERIF




what i like the most is the warning that it is illegal for me to publish the messages! Sorry you can not enforce that after the fact. My work email attaches something like that too. Now I could lose my job I guess if I violate it but it is not a legally binding statement as there was never any opportunity to refuse the communication.

[Edited 9/1/12 17:32pm]


I just want to clarify the legal language as I see it. And I'm a corporate attorney so maybe that counts for something, I don't know.

You did not do anything illegal by choosing to post these letters here on a discussion site. The "legalese" at the bottom is saying that the Web Sheriff letter is copyrighted material, therefore you cannot misappropriate it like any other copyrighted material. You cannot send it to other people as a prank or to do your own enforcing, you cannot use the language as your own and publish it (like plagiarism, also actionable).

The "legalese" at the top saying "private, confidential, to addressee only" basically warns other people who might see it (because it's wrongly delivered or accidentally opened by someone not the addressee) that this is a confidential, private communication not meant for them. You may wonder, OK so someone else has now seen it, so what does the "warning" matter? Yes, what has been seen by an unintended party cannot be unseen, but the language does have a purpose if a matter involving this communication comes to litigation. The unintended party cannot offer confidential information that was not intended for them into evidence. So the language is crucial protection in a procedural sense. In legal procedure, facts/ information that cannot be entered into evidence properly do not exist in the case.

If you choose to show someone your confidential communication, you have waived your right to confidentiality. For example, medical result documents may have the "confidential" warning on top (that tells other people it is not meant for them), but if you show your medical results to someone, you have waived your right to confidentiality to that person.

The other "legalese" which you do not reference, but I will explain anyway for those interested, is the "without prejudice" language. It just means that this Web Sheriff communication/ warning is not lieu of formal legal action by Web Sheriff's client (that is, by Prince). Whatever contained in these Web Sheriff messages does not preclude or forgo any argument that could be made in a formal legal action.

So while I see you relish the idea that you have somehow stuck it to Web sheriff or Prince by graciously choosing to share these communications with us here, that's really not the case. You have done nothing wrong or subversive by sharing them.

Posting a rant about an artist plagiarizing or stealing IP and claiming it as fact, however, can be quite wrong and I would say yes, verging on libelous. But I have not seen your YT clip in question nor have any facts about it so I'm just making conjectures there.

Thanks again for sharing.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 09/02/12 7:21am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

artist76 said:

I just want to clarify the legal language as I see it. And I'm a corporate attorney so maybe that counts for something, I don't know. You did not do anything illegal by choosing to post these letters here on a discussion site. The "legalese" at the bottom is saying that the Web Sheriff letter is copyrighted material, therefore you cannot misappropriate it like any other copyrighted material. You cannot send it to other people as a prank or to do your own enforcing, you cannot use the language as your own and publish it (like plagiarism, also actionable).

Oh Interesting: I focused on the " that all publication and communication to any third party (other than, of course, your attorneys) is strictly prohibited and actionable against you..." As seems to say that I am not allowed to show that to anyone other than an attorney.

The "legalese" at the top saying "private, confidential, to addressee only" basically warns other people who might see it (because it's wrongly delivered or accidentally opened by someone not the addressee) that this is a confidential, private communication not meant for them. You may wonder, OK so someone else has now seen it, so what does the "warning" matter? Yes, what has been seen by an unintended party cannot be unseen, but the language does have a purpose if a matter involving this communication comes to litigation. The unintended party cannot offer confidential information that was not intended for them into evidence. So the language is crucial protection in a procedural sense. In legal procedure, facts/ information that cannot be entered into evidence properly do not exist in the case. If you choose to show someone your confidential communication, you have waived your right to confidentiality. For example, medical result documents may have the "confidential" warning on top (that tells other people it is not meant for them), but if you show your mTedical results to someone, you have waived your right to confidentiality to that person.

That is how I understand that as well.

The other "legalese" which you do not reference, but I will explain anyway for those interested, is the "without prejudice" language. It just means that this Web Sheriff communication/ warning is not lieu of formal legal action by Web Sheriff's client (that is, by Prince). Whatever contained in these Web Sheriff messages does not preclude or forgo any argument that could be made in a formal legal action.

Again, I understand that. Like when a judge dismisses a case 'without prejudice' then the same case/charges can be refiled. If dismissed 'WITH Prejudice' it can not be refiled.

So while I see you relish the idea that you have somehow stuck it to Web sheriff or Prince by graciously choosing to share these communications with us here, that's really not the case. You have done nothing wrong or subversive by sharing them.

I am not sure I relished it at all. I just pointed out that the statement was not something that could be held (and you seemed to have confirmed) against me. *and this letter is a few years old too*

Posting a rant about an artist plagiarizing or stealing IP and claiming it as fact, however, can be quite wrong and I would say yes, verging on libelous. But I have not seen your YT clip in question nor have any facts about it so I'm just making conjectures there. Thanks again for sharing.

As a lawyer you know that the standard for a successful libelous cases against a public figure by a lay person is very high. That it would have to be done with a reckless disregard for the truth.

The reason IT IS NOT liblous was in the "about" section of the video. I cited cases and examples and sources for my claims. At the time Prince was being sued over "Girl 6" I also named "guess who's knocking", "Do me Baby" "Party UP" and a few tracks off of "For You" that Chris Moon suggested he wrote or co-wrote and was either not credited or under credited for (that was from the book "Pop Life").

All of those examples are either well established (true or not is not material) parts of Prince lore or as was the case of the For You songs, from a published work--and thus no action action against me would have a chance in a US Court. **note the web sheriff is in the UK which they may be successful. In part because I would not go there and in part because no US court would affirm any judgments against me for what I said.

Thanks for your Reply.

"Keep on shilling for Big Pharm!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 09/02/12 9:22pm

7souls

Speaking as someone NOT in the legal field or music industry, how does this work? Does Prince scan the dead internet, see a video or a picture or a link to another site hosting the vid/pic, then contact which ever current attorney he has that thinks they're getting paid and tell them to contact WS about that specific thing? Or does he/his atty just make a blanket statement to WS saying 'you guys look thru the web and send a C&D on anything that you find'?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 09/02/12 9:56pm

udo

avatar

Webseheriff is no logal entity related to Prince as far as I know.
Email is no legal communication method without sufficient authentication.
Did they provide a verifieable GPG/PGP pubkey? Sign their email with that?

If not I would insist on an oldskool written letter from the lawyers repesenting mr P.
Explain them that they have no real expectation of privacy/confidentiality of their communicatons with out, first.
Then you'd know the issue is real and you could auction off the letter later. biggrin

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Prince's Lawyers' Papers