databank said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

The estate had to spend time and effort and money to squash this ridiculous case, simply because some chancer decided to pretend he didn't know what his contract with Prince entailed. This dude openly defied copyright laws. There was no way he was going to get off with a slap on the wrist; he was going to be made an example of. The estate knows damn well there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of such recordings out there, and if they let this one slide the floodgates will open. Boxill isn't some naive guy, he's worked in the business for ages and he should have known that what he was doing was wildly illegal.

It's not about that, of course he was wrong and he should have known (or knew), it's about punishment being proportionate. He didn't kill someone, he just stole something.

If it was your stuff he stole, you probably wouldn't say "he just stole something".

The original award was for $3,000,000 in damages and about $960,000 in fees and costs. I haven't been able to track down the actual arbitration filing so I don't know if the $3 million is all damages, or damages + punitive award.

If it's just damages, then the estate would have had to prove up that $3 million number and convince the arbitrator that's how much revenue the estate would have earned had it released those songs. And/or, they would have to show that's how much Boxill DID earn through his release of those songs.

If it's damages + punitive award, which I think is most likely, then as Bart and others have said the dollar amount was calculated to discourage anyone else from releasing music of Prince that they don't own.

In my research I did see a rather interesting filing for sanctions. It seems that Boxill and two other defendants erased a bunch of text messages and were sanctioned (fined) in the amount of $10,000 for that. Erasing text messages and wiping clean cell phones isn't something an honest person does.

RodeoSchro said:

databank said:

BartVanHemelen said: It's not about that, of course he was wrong and he should have known (or knew), it's about punishment being proportionate. He didn't kill someone, he just stole something.

If it was your stuff he stole, you probably wouldn't say "he just stole something".

The original award was for $3,000,000 in damages and about $960,000 in fees and costs. I haven't been able to track down the actual arbitration filing so I don't know if the $3 million is all damages, or damages + punitive award.

If it's just damages, then the estate would have had to prove up that $3 million number and convince the arbitrator that's how much revenue the estate would have earned had it released those songs. And/or, they would have to show that's how much Boxill DID earn through his release of those songs.

If it's damages + punitive award, which I think is most likely, then as Bart and others have said the dollar amount was calculated to discourage anyone else from releasing music of Prince that they don't own.

In my research I did see a rather interesting filing for sanctions. It seems that Boxill and two other defendants erased a bunch of text messages and were sanctioned (fined) in the amount of $10,000 for that. Erasing text messages and wiping clean cell phones isn't something an honest person does.

If it was my stuff he stole I would probably wish for him to be beaten to death, but thanks God the court would not bend to my tantrum and give him a reasonable punishment instead. This is why I believe we need a justice system and a good one.

So IDK, OK? I usually find American sentences to be incredibly harsh, I'm shocked by the fact that some people take and do life sentence in the US. Now lawyers are super expensive and the party who's right shouldn't have to pay for their lawyers, but then again I find it very questionable that lawyers should be allowed to charge such unreasonable amounts if it may end-up being at the expense of someone else than the person who hired them.

So again I'm truing to be careful because IDK how much money IB has or made from this, and IDK what sort of impact this will have on him. All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

Not saying I'm right, just that's how I perceive it.

Ian received really bad legal advice before he released the Deliverance EP.

There will be an appeal and it will be caught up in the legal system for a long time.

[Edited 4/10/19 21:22pm]

databank said:

All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

.

Nobody forced him to do this. He's an industry professional and he wouldn't have even dared to think about doing this while Prince was alive.

.

And again: it's not just about punishing him. This is also about the estate vigorously defending their rights and showing to others that they won't tolerate these kinds of shenanigans.

.

Also: what amount would be an appropriate punishment? Let's not forget that $1 million of the amount is him paying the costs of this court case et al. Methinks $1 million would already ruin somebody's life.

.

Boxill did all this to himself. He ruined his own reputation. He isn't some innocent bystander, or somebody who accidentally did something wrong.

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

.

Nobody forced him to do this. He's an industry professional and he wouldn't have even dared to think about doing this while Prince was alive.

.

And again: it's not just about punishing him. This is also about the estate vigorously defending their rights and showing to others that they won't tolerate these kinds of shenanigans.

.

Also: what amount would be an appropriate punishment? Let's not forget that $1 million of the amount is him paying the costs of this court case et al. Methinks $1 million would already ruin somebody's life.

.

Boxill did all this to himself. He ruined his own reputation. He isn't some innocent bystander, or somebody who accidentally did something wrong.

BVH you are starting to sound like P did when he was at his most attack minded! If you feel this strongly I am guessing you won't ever download a free bootleg again?!

PURPLEIZED3121 said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Nobody forced him to do this. He's an industry professional and he wouldn't have even dared to think about doing this while Prince was alive.

.

And again: it's not just about punishing him. This is also about the estate vigorously defending their rights and showing to others that they won't tolerate these kinds of shenanigans.

.

Also: what amount would be an appropriate punishment? Let's not forget that $1 million of the amount is him paying the costs of this court case et al. Methinks $1 million would already ruin somebody's life.

.

Boxill did all this to himself. He ruined his own reputation. He isn't some innocent bystander, or somebody who accidentally did something wrong.

BVH you are starting to sound like P did when he was at his most attack minded! If you feel this strongly I am guessing you won't ever download a free bootleg again?!

.
There is a difference between putting out a bootleg underground that will only reach the diehard fans – and publicly boasting about co-writing songs with Prince (that's a lie already), claiming co-ownership (another lie) and putting them out for worldwide release through the legal channels.
.

[Edited 4/11/19 4:04am]

PURPLEIZED3121 said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Nobody forced him to do this. He's an industry professional and he wouldn't have even dared to think about doing this while Prince was alive.

.

And again: it's not just about punishing him. This is also about the estate vigorously defending their rights and showing to others that they won't tolerate these kinds of shenanigans.

.

Also: what amount would be an appropriate punishment? Let's not forget that $1 million of the amount is him paying the costs of this court case et al. Methinks $1 million would already ruin somebody's life.

.

Boxill did all this to himself. He ruined his own reputation. He isn't some innocent bystander, or somebody who accidentally did something wrong.

BVH you are starting to sound like P did when he was at his most attack minded! If you feel this strongly I am guessing you won't ever download a free bootleg again?!

Bart is just explaining the reality here, he isn't even being rude or unreasonable. Not sure what an end user downloading a bootleg has to do with it? I don't think any of us are unhappy that the Deliverance EP music got put out. But we shouldn't be surprised that the person who decided to sell it is getting in trouble for doing so. The fine is very high but as Bart and others have pointed out, it has to also deter others from doing the same thing.

Kares said:

PURPLEIZED3121 said:

BVH you are starting to sound like P did when he was at his most attack minded! If you feel this strongly I am guessing you won't ever download a free bootleg again?!

.
There is a difference between putting out a bootleg underground that will only reach the diehard fans – and publicly boasting about co-writing songs with Prince (that's a lie already), claiming co-ownership (another lie) and putting them out for worldwide release through the legal channels.
.

[Edited 4/11/19 4:04am]

sorry but I strongly disagree - the principle of illegality is the same. Both cases are still theft aren't they? Sabotatge never gave anything for free - it was always sold wasn't it?

I have huge misgivings on supporting bootleggers & likewise engineers/ex-band members etc who release / leak incredible works like the Deliverance EP. As long as the estate etc are locked in legal BS then long live the free bootleggers !!

As for my point re BVH I just find that particular post hypocritical. Also relatively shocked that he managed to make a sensible point without resorting to personal abuse or being patronising!!

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

.

Nobody forced him to do this. He's an industry professional and he wouldn't have even dared to think about doing this while Prince was alive.

.

And again: it's not just about punishing him. This is also about the estate vigorously defending their rights and showing to others that they won't tolerate these kinds of shenanigans.

.

Also: what amount would be an appropriate punishment? Let's not forget that $1 million of the amount is him paying the costs of this court case et al. Methinks $1 million would already ruin somebody's life.

.

Boxill did all this to himself. He ruined his own reputation. He isn't some innocent bystander, or somebody who accidentally did something wrong.

I'm not arguing with any of this.

I answered to your questions earlier. I do not believe someone should be made to pay lawyers that charge indecent sums like this if they didn't hire them themselves, and I do not believe anyone should be able to pay millions for any offence or crime whatsoever, unless they're already millionaires or made millions from the crime and can give the money back. It'd be like, IDK, sentencing a hobo to pay fifty-thousand dollars for shoplifting an apple. Stealing apples is wrong, but asking a homeless person to pay 50,000 bucks is absurd.

I'm not criticizing the Estate there, they did what they had to, and I'm not questioning Boxill's guilt, hell, I'm not even criticizing the judge, I'm questioning a justice system that allows such a sentence to be pronounced. And I ain't saying I'm right or have all the answers, just that I do not believe this to be reasonable.

Now I don't know, maybe Boxill can pay 4M, and if so then it's cool.

databank said:

I answered to your questions earlier. I do not believe someone should be made to pay lawyers that charge indecent sums like this if they didn't hire them themselves,

.

Boxill caused this entire court case. Why shouldn't he be responsible for paying its costs?

.

and I do not believe anyone should be able to pay millions for any offence or crime whatsoever, unless they're already millionaires or made millions from the crime and can give the money back.

.

Why would you believe the word of a criminal when it comes to how much he made from a crime?

databank said:

RodeoSchro said:

If it was your stuff he stole, you probably wouldn't say "he just stole something".

The original award was for $3,000,000 in damages and about $960,000 in fees and costs. I haven't been able to track down the actual arbitration filing so I don't know if the $3 million is all damages, or damages + punitive award.

If it's just damages, then the estate would have had to prove up that $3 million number and convince the arbitrator that's how much revenue the estate would have earned had it released those songs. And/or, they would have to show that's how much Boxill DID earn through his release of those songs.

If it's damages + punitive award, which I think is most likely, then as Bart and others have said the dollar amount was calculated to discourage anyone else from releasing music of Prince that they don't own.

In my research I did see a rather interesting filing for sanctions. It seems that Boxill and two other defendants erased a bunch of text messages and were sanctioned (fined) in the amount of $10,000 for that. Erasing text messages and wiping clean cell phones isn't something an honest person does.

If it was my stuff he stole I would probably wish for him to be beaten to death, but thanks God the court would not bend to my tantrum and give him a reasonable punishment instead. This is why I believe we need a justice system and a good one.

So IDK, OK? I usually find American sentences to be incredibly harsh, I'm shocked by the fact that some people take and do life sentence in the US. Now lawyers are super expensive and the party who's right shouldn't have to pay for their lawyers, but then again I find it very questionable that lawyers should be allowed to charge such unreasonable amounts if it may end-up being at the expense of someone else than the person who hired them.

So again I'm truing to be careful because IDK how much money IB has or made from this, and IDK what sort of impact this will have on him. All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

Not saying I'm right, just that's how I perceive it.

I appreciate your answers and LOL at the part about if it was your stuff. That's how I felt too when I had some stuff stolen once!

The way that punitive damages work in the USA is this:

If it's found that a person did something wrong in business, then it is assumed that others could do the same thing unless the penalty for doing it is so harsh as to discourage anyone else from trying the same thing.

Look at it this way: Suppose there are two people that have recordings from Prince for which they were contracted to produce. One is Ian Boxhll; let's call the other "John Doe".

Now, if Boxill is found to have violated his contract with Prince and is fined, let's say, $50,000 then John Doe might say, "Fifty thousand dollars? Is that all? I'll make that much in the first hour if I release these recordings for sale. In fact, I'll probably make $750,000 total profit. So if all I have to do is pay a $50,000 fine, I'll end up with $700,000".

John Doe would do that in a heartbeat and of course the Prince estate would get screwed.

So the arbitrator in the Boxill case followed precedent, which was to penalize Boxill enough so that no one else would try the same thing he did.

PURPLEIZED3121 said:

Kares said:

.
There is a difference between putting out a bootleg underground that will only reach the diehard fans – and publicly boasting about co-writing songs with Prince (that's a lie already), claiming co-ownership (another lie) and putting them out for worldwide release through the legal channels.
.

[Edited 4/11/19 4:04am]

sorry but I strongly disagree - the principle of illegality is the same. Both cases are still theft aren't they? Sabotatge never gave anything for free - it was always sold wasn't it?

I have huge misgivings on supporting bootleggers & likewise engineers/ex-band members etc who release / leak incredible works like the Deliverance EP. As long as the estate etc are locked in legal BS then long live the free bootleggers !!

.

Let me put it this way: leaking/selling a 3rd gen cassette copy of something (that perhaps Prince gave to a friend or left behind in a hired car) to a bootleg label that'll sell 3-5 thousand copies to hardcore fans is illegal and risky of course, but it's mostly an anonymous and underground business.

.
On the other hand, one of Prince's engineers keeping pristine copies of multitracks despite knowing full well that he had to sign a contract and an NDA that prohibits it – now that's a whole different story. If Prince wanted Boxill to keep copies and keep working on new arrangements and mixes, Boxill would've done that work in a timely fashion and would've delivered the results and everything else to Paisley Park. But no – he's just sat on it until Prince passed, and only then he started working on the material, adding parts just so he can claim a co-writing credit and co-producer credit, and based on those made up claims he's basically waved his dick in the face of the Estate and claimed co-ownership of these masters too, and then tried to distribute the release worldwide.
.

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

I answered to your questions earlier. I do not believe someone should be made to pay lawyers that charge indecent sums like this if they didn't hire them themselves,

.

Boxill caused this entire court case. Why shouldn't he be responsible for paying its costs?

He didn't choose the lawyers. Their fee is ridiculous.

.

and I do not believe anyone should be able to pay millions for any offence or crime whatsoever, unless they're already millionaires or made millions from the crime and can give the money back.

.

Why would you believe the word of a criminal when it comes to how much he made from a crime?

In that particular case there's no cash from digital album sales so it's easy to know.

Kares said:

RodeoSchro said:

databank said:

If it was my stuff he stole I would probably wish for him to be beaten to death, but thanks God the court would not bend to my tantrum and give him a reasonable punishment instead. This is why I believe we need a justice system and a good one.

So IDK, OK? I usually find American sentences to be incredibly harsh, I'm shocked by the fact that some people take and do life sentence in the US. Now lawyers are super expensive and the party who's right shouldn't have to pay for their lawyers, but then again I find it very questionable that lawyers should be allowed to charge such unreasonable amounts if it may end-up being at the expense of someone else than the person who hired them.

So again I'm truing to be careful because IDK how much money IB has or made from this, and IDK what sort of impact this will have on him. All I'm saying is that from an ordinary person's perspective, 4M is a death sentence. Now there's this bankrupcy thing and all, but if it means, IDK, his house and any money he has is seized before that, and he ends-up penniless, I'm sorry but that's what I call destroying a man's life.

Not saying I'm right, just that's how I perceive it.

I appreciate your answers and LOL at the part about if it was your stuff. That's how I felt too when I had some stuff stolen once!

The way that punitive damages work in the USA is this:

If it's found that a person did something wrong in business, then it is assumed that others could do the same thing unless the penalty for doing it is so harsh as to discourage anyone else from trying the same thing.

Look at it this way: Suppose there are two people that have recordings from Prince for which they were contracted to produce. One is Ian Boxhll; let's call the other "John Doe".

Now, if Boxill is found to have violated his contract with Prince and is fined, let's say, $50,000 then John Doe might say, "Fifty thousand dollars? Is that all? I'll make that much in the first hour if I release these recordings for sale. In fact, I'll probably make $750,000 total profit. So if all I have to do is pay a $50,000 fine, I'll end up with $700,000".

John Doe would do that in a heartbeat and of course the Prince estate would get screwed.

So the arbitrator in the Boxill case followed precedent, which was to penalize Boxill enough so that no one else would try the same thing he did.

I realize that but I never found this "dissuasive for others" approach to justice to be morally fair. Necessary? Maybe, IDK. But it should only be dissuasive for the perp to do it again, one cannot be held responsible for the potential crimes of others. I do not believe that the role of justice is to be punitive either, only to compensate the victims accordingly to the harm done, and dissuasive for the perp themselves only. So sometimes the most efficient thing to do isn't the right one, and sometimes effiency is more important than what's right, and of course I may be wrong about what I believe is right, I'm perfectly awre of all that. But deep down I consider the necessity you evoke as a necessary evil at best, not justice in the way I envision it.

databank said:

databank said:

I answered to your questions earlier. I do not believe someone should be made to pay lawyers that charge indecent sums like this if they didn't hire them themselves,

.

Boxill caused this entire court case. Why shouldn't he be responsible for paying its costs?

He didn't choose the lawyers. Their fee is ridiculous.

.

Boxill chose to go up against the Prince Estate, knowing that he's going to have to fight a whole team of some of the biggest entertainment industry lawyers in the country. He must have had advisors and lawyers telling him that it will be a very expensive and risky battle.
.

Kares said:

databank said:

.

Boxill caused this entire court case. Why shouldn't he be responsible for paying its costs?

He didn't choose the lawyers. Their fee is ridiculous.

.

Boxill chose to go up against the Prince Estate, knowing that he's going to have to fight a whole team of some of the biggest entertainment industry lawyers in the country. He must have had advisors and lawyers telling him that it will be a very expensive and risky battle.
.

True, but honestly I would like to understand his reasoning and how he or any 'advisor' he may have had could even hope to get away with this. We're on the edge of mental illness here.

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

Kares said:

.

Boxill chose to go up against the Prince Estate, knowing that he's going to have to fight a whole team of some of the biggest entertainment industry lawyers in the country. He must have had advisors and lawyers telling him that it will be a very expensive and risky battle.
.

True, but honestly I would like to understand his reasoning and how he or any 'advisor' he may have had could even hope to get away with this. We're on the edge of mental illness here.

.

The only possible answer I can think of is that perhaps he was counting on the Estate still being in disarray, the courts still debating who's an heir and who isn't, the majors and their different legal teams fighting over the rights etc... I guess he hoped the Estate would either cooperate with him in bringing out a new release or that they won't be organised enough to go against him with full force – or that they won't be so quick to shut him down before he could cash in big time. He was wrong.
.

[Edited 4/11/19 10:42am]

Kares said:

databank said:

True, but honestly I would like to understand his reasoning and how he or any 'advisor' he may have had could even hope to get away with this. We're on the edge of mental illness here.

.

The only possible answer I can think of is that perhaps he was counting on the Estate still being in disarray, the courts still debating who's an heir and who isn't, the majors and their different legal teams fighting over the rights etc... I guess he hoped the Estate would either cooperate with him in bringing out a new release or that they won't be organised enough to go against him with full force – or that they won't be so quick to shut him down before he could cash in big time. He was wrong.
.

There is a lawsuit against the attorneys that advised Boxhill he had a legal right to release the music.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Kares said:

.

The only possible answer I can think of is that perhaps he was counting on the Estate still being in disarray, the courts still debating who's an heir and who isn't, the majors and their different legal teams fighting over the rights etc... I guess he hoped the Estate would either cooperate with him in bringing out a new release or that they won't be organised enough to go against him with full force – or that they won't be so quick to shut him down before he could cash in big time. He was wrong.
.

There is a lawsuit against the attorneys that advised Boxhill he had a legal right to release the music.

By Boxill or by the Estate?

databank said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

There is a lawsuit against the attorneys that advised Boxhill he had a legal right to release the music.

By Boxill or by the Estate?

The Estate file the case but I forgot the lawsuit was dismissed because Minnesota did not have jurisdiction over the attorneys because they do not practice in Minnesota. The Estate probably has filed in their home state or in federal court by now...I will have to research.

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

As a Prince fan, I think he did a public good releasing such a lithe and wiry EP, that was a delight. It seems like he was doing something that Prince and the estate of Prince would not/would not have released.

databank said:

I realize that but I never found this "dissuasive for others" approach to justice to be morally fair. Necessary? Maybe, IDK.

.

Are you serious? Look at how much wasted time and effort and money this ONE CASE has been. Now apply the same to dozens of cases, maybe hundreds.

databank said:

He didn't choose the lawyers. Their fee is ridiculous.

Boxill picked this fight. Not expecting the estate to hire experienced and specialized lawyers is his mistake. Again: all of this could have been avoided by Boxill NOT COMMITTING A CRIME.

Kares said:

databank said:

True, but honestly I would like to understand his reasoning and how he or any 'advisor' he may have had could even hope to get away with this. We're on the edge of mental illness here.

.

The only possible answer I can think of is that perhaps he was counting on the Estate still being in disarray, the courts still debating who's an heir and who isn't, the majors and their different legal teams fighting over the rights etc... I guess he hoped the Estate would either cooperate with him in bringing out a new release or that they won't be organised enough to go against him with full force – or that they won't be so quick to shut him down before he could cash in big time. He was wrong.

.

That's my guess as well.

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

He didn't choose the lawyers. Their fee is ridiculous.

Boxill picked this fight. Not expecting the estate to hire experienced and specialized lawyers is his mistake. Again: all of this could have been avoided by Boxill NOT COMMITTING A CRIME.

.
In my eyes, he actually committed two crimes. One is what you're referring to. The other is a moral crime and that one bothers me even more. He was trusted by Prince, he had the honour of being able to work with this amazing genius. He's betrayed that trust and disrespected Prince by fiddling with his works, adding parts to them on his own initiative. Not only he wasn't commissioned by Prince to do so, but he wasn't even hired by Prince as a musician, he was hired as an engineer. In other words: Prince didn't see him as a musical collaborator, yet Boxill tried to elevate himself into that status after Prince passed away.
.
And he wasn't good at it either. I love the 'Deliverance' EP, but I can't help noticing certain parts that Prince wouldn't have done. Take the chorus in 'Deliverance', for example. You could say it's a nice and fitting touch. Okay, but you're missing the point about how Prince produced his music. He was a true musician who interacted with his musicians, even when the other instruments were played by himself too. When he added a part, he gave it room and gave it a purpose, and often interacted with that part on another instrument.
Had he heard 'Deliverance' with a gospel choir in his mind before starting to record it, he would've given that choir more room and purpose, especially at the end of the song. He would've went on at least a bit more and would've interacted with the choir instead of elevating the song for just two lines and then suddenly ending it. The way Boxill did that never felt right to me. His additions are about himself. Prince approached music with huge respect and he rarely played more than what he deemed necessary. I don't hear that respect in Boxill's approach.
.
If Prince would've ever given me a chance to work with him either as an engineer or musician, I would never ever have the nerve to add parts to one of his recordings, especially when he's not around anymore to object or approve. And I always found it extremely distasteful and outrageous when people try "duetting" with a late great artist. Especially when it's a nobody like Kenny G pissing over the great Louis Armstrong's recording.
.

[Edited 4/12/19 3:19am]

donnyenglish said:

Many of us would contribute to a go fund me for Boxill if someone started one. He has done more for the fans than CoAmerica, the Heirs or the record companies since his passing. He took a huge risk to give us his music. I agree that it was ill advised and perhaps a bit shady but he did give a moment of excitement that we had not felt since the release of Phase 2.

.

Jesus...!

.
Stop romanticising crime. If Boxill would've wanted to simply share these Prince tracks with the fans, he could've done so without fiddling with the tapes and without trying to profit from them. No – he wanted his name next to Prince's. He wanted to be credited as an equal partner in writing and producing. He wanted to cash in. End of story.

[Edited 4/12/19 4:55am]