Question: "Why doesnt Prince compete with bootleggers instead of going after fan sites that only give info on bootlegs?"

While this makes some sense, its faulty logic. This would be like just going after the poppy field farmers and drug smugglers and not arresting the dealers. They are all guilty if there is a law against what they do. Thus they are subject to the law. Prince is exercising his rights under the law.

Competing with the bootleggers would make sense as well. Personally, I wish he would step up his efforts through the NPGMC to do just that. However, the market - even the hardcore longtime Prince collector segment of it - can be over saturated. Prince already releases more material than most, if not all, pop artists on this planet. I might be apprehensive if I were Prince when I heard so called fans complaining about the membership fee and what they didnt get and how they refuse to support the club. Everyone wants something different (Roadhouse Garden, Crystal Ball II, the Celebration recordings, concert videos, certain merchandise items, free and damn near free stuff, etc) and it probably just isnt possible or feasible to offer everything. In fact, much of what people want and expect has not even been proven to exist.

I loved Guide2Prince.org.(even though they would lag on updates over the last year or so) It helped me manage my large bootleg collection. But I have no remorse for collecting them because I, unlike so many bootleg collectors, have EVERY official release in audio and video. Prince and NPG lose no money on fans like me because I buy everything they offer and then I get what they dont offer on the blakc market.

If we expect and accept the benefits of Prince's courage and bravado to be independent (so that he can release anything he wants at anytime that he wants), we have to at least understand what it takes to protect his interests which enable him to remain independent.

When you stop to think about the big picture and the law and relinquish the greedy and egocentric position on this issue, it does make sense - even though you may not like it.
[This message was edited Wed Jan 28 13:43:52 PST 2004 by undulatingacrobat]
[This message was edited Wed Jan 28 13:44:46 PST 2004 by undulatingacrobat]

It's hard to find the dealers, but it's easy to find websites that post info on bootlegs. so why not go for what is available to you?
I don't think he's doing nothing against the dealers and makers of the bootlegs. I'm sure if he has any info on them, he'll do his best to stop them.

TweetyBird said:

Would it really be that hard? Some of these bootleg companies have world-wide distributions. There must be a chink in the armour somewhere.

sabaisabai said:

No chink. You're forgetting that everyone can become a bootlegger these days as long as they've got a CD burner.

undulatingacrobat said:

Actually, if I can borrow your "Just Say No" analogy, it's like shutting down High Times magazine and not going after the dealers or the people who grow pot.

undulatingacrobat said:

I am not fully sure about this whole bootleg issue, although I know it appears contentious. My answer, though unclear, is this: I have a feeling it is something to do with the fact that P views his songs ("creations") as his children.

Your logic with the comparison is totally flawed.

A better comparison would be to compare g2p to a documentary on the pros and cons of various illegal drugs by users, former users, etc.

By your logic, you would deny movies like Trainspotting, Pulp Fiction, Saving Private Ryan, Juice, etc. from ever being made because they promote real life experiences with various forms of illegal activity.

The only sticky point about G2P.org was the rating system they used. And that is something that a judge might just say "yeah, you should change that" to.


Instead of phrases like "this boot is a must have," change it to a system of grading the material on various aspects of audio/video.

but...all is lost to the winds of change I suppose.

undulatingacrobat said:

Dauphin said:

Dauphin said:

What? Guide2Prince did not provide ANY documentary info on the pros and cons of bootleg material or the industry - nor was this the intent of the site. It discussed the value, quality, and content of the bootleg products and - in a way - provided bootleg purchasers (aka collectors) with the info that they needed to make informed buying decisions. The bootleg market was supported to some extent by the existence of the site. Hell, I never bought one of my hundreds of bootlegs without consulting that site first. I will miss it dearly but I will stand for Prince's right to challenge its existence on a legal basis.

The difference is that movies are entertainment and not presented as fact. Guide2Prince was presentig facts about real life illegal products. Thus, the pivotal difference being between fiction (such as movies) and reality (the bootleg market). Alas, it is aslo an essential difference that escapes so many so called Prince fans.
[This message was edited Wed Jan 28 13:41:28 PST 2004 by undulatingacrobat]

undulatingacrobat said:

Uhhh, have you heard of "Documentaries??"

And what's with all the die-hards who probably have memorized the content of every boot being so quick to defend the closing of sites like G2P??? What now that y'all got what you need you don't want nobody else to?

By the way, there's also a little something in this country called "Free Speech". So we have the right to discuss bootlegs til we are blue in the face and give them whatever ratings we want.

Well, you know, snuff movies are illegal but you can show detailed dramatized depictions of them ("9MM" comes to mind) as long as the depictions are negative in scope. So maybe someone should start a highly detailed site of Prince bootlegs, but from the point of view of "oh my God, it's a travesty that these horrible items exist in the world and we are opening up the world's eyes to these heinous recordings".

After all, it's amazing what you can get away with if you can cop a self-righteous enough attitude.

undulatingacrobat said:

Show me the text of the law that says TALKING about bootlegs is illegal. Show me how Prince is "excercising" his rights by shutting down fan websites that talk about bootlegs, instead of the real bad guys who sell the bootlegs to people like you.


Judging by your statements that you own everything that has been offcially released and you are still not satisfied the market doesn't look saturated at all. Flawed logic.


All the more reason for Prince to also go after people like you, since it's people like you who keep the bootleggers in big business, no? Or are you trying to say that YOU don't do anything wrong?


erm...as in buying loads of bootlegs like you do?

If we're going for the drug analogy, then G2P would be
something like a "Which Weed?" magazine, offering opinions
on what kind of puff is best, and having a spliff rating
system. Now you KNOW a mag like that would never be allowed!
So why the suprise about the closing of G2P.org?

If anything, you'd think Prince would empathize with fans who buy boots, since he's admitted to doing the same with James Brown's music when he was young.

I'm sure he was buying James' released material, too. He should know that the only people the boot sites would matter to would be his diehard fans.

The only argument that is flawed is the one that suggests Prince is making sense by going after the people who've supported him over the years.

He's an idiot, plain and simple.

i think if prince supplied the world with the music people want there would be less demand for bootlegs, so the argument does work.
[This message was edited Wed Jan 28 15:27:32 PST 2004 by XxAxX]

Ever hear about _High Times_ Magazine


http://www.hightimes.com/


Thank you for helping my point that exercising your freedom of speech about something illegal is perfectly legal in it's own right (in the U.S. at least)

BorisFishpaw said:

undulatingacrobat said:

Actualy, it was a documentary of Prince related bootleg material. Imagine a review of "Saving Private Ryan" or "A Nightmare on Elm Street" and the reviewer disucussing the quality of the kill scenes and where there are better kill scenes in other movies. Think to a movie like _SLC Punk!_ which is clearly a work of fiction, but still a commentary of alternative lifesyle in Salt Lake City, Utah. A lifestyle that is complete with references to plenty of illegal activities. And more clearly, look to the various documentaries dealing with the mafia, serial killers, etc. Note how they dissect the crimes and compare them to each other.

In the end, what this boils down to is:

Does Paisley Park have the right to sue G2P.org?

Yes. Anybody can bring a lawsuit about anything you can think of.

Does Paisley Park have any leg to stand on?

No, with a caveat. As a U.S. owned website, G2P has the right to post research on any topic.

The caveat here is that the DMCA allows strange lawsuits to be brought by copyright owners. Now, when I'm talking about copyright owners, I'm not just talking about the music. I'm also talking about the IMAGES that are on the site.

The images on the site are clearly scans of illegal material, but the scans include images of Prince himself. As such, he may have a case in that the images should be taken down.

Also, the rating system is a strange brew too. That combined with the various quotes of "this is a must have boot" may let a judge decide to at least HEAR the case. I seriously doubt that G2P would be found guilty of any serious crimes of copyright infringement or defamation of charater, but the judge MAY recommend/force that G2P remove any images, the rating system, and the comments that seem to promote the purchase of illegal material.

Dauphin said:

Indeed he may have a case, and he may not have a case. But such a case will not justify shutting down the entire website. Just the removal of the images will do then.


Indeed a judge may or may not force G2P to remove those ratings and comments that seem to promote the purchase of illegal material, but that also doesn't justify taking down the entire website. Just the removal of the ratings and comments that seem to promote will do then.


--
[This message was edited Thu Jan 29 6:36:12 PST 2004 by Abrazo]

undulatingacrobat said:

it sounds like when you buy all the official stuff you all of a sudden have certain rights... so people who only bought PURPLE RAIN should feel remorse ?

GaryMF said:

Documentaries are based on fact. There is a difference between movies and documentaries. The point that was raised earlier was that some MOVIES promoted illegal behaviour. Documentaries inform and educate. They are culled from real life and history.

I would like to see the site come back and I think it should be allowed to exist. However, this is a country of laws. If Prince has a legitimate legal basis for his actions against these sites, then he has the right to exercise it. If you are a bootlegger or have a site that sells them or have a site that talks about them and there is a law against it, take your lumps when Londell comes knocking - its that simple. If you want no legal trouble, make sure what you are doing is legal first. Its not that hard.
[This message was edited Thu Jan 29 14:50:15 PST 2004 by undulatingacrobat]

dawntreader said:

You said "rights"; I didnt. I made a simple statement that Prince loses no money on people like me that buy all official releases regardless of what bootlegs are avaialble. I had the Black Album since 1988. Whe it was officially released years later, I bought 2 copies.

You see, one reason that the artists worry about bootleggers is that they can cut into the potential revenues that could be gained by official releases. Some people will buy them instead of official releases. Someone who has no rights to the material is selling it and getting profits that should go to the owner of the material. Now, if I buy all the material that is out there, the financial impact on the artist is maximized because he/she has sold me EVERYTHING that they have to sell.

If you can tell Prince to his face that you have every single, CD, video, and NPGMC download file (from your paid membership), then you do have something to say on the question of buying bootlegs. You can tell Prince that he has made all the money that he could have possibly make on you as a fan (except for concerts and associated merchandise).
[This message was edited Thu Jan 29 14:52:11 PST 2004 by undulatingacrobat]

undulatingacrobat said:

That's the whole point dude... there IS NO LAW against TALKING about bootlegs!!!

Yes ...making boots, selling bootlegs... all illegal. No one is questioning that.

Talking about them: legal... (until proven otherwise in a court of law, which in the event that does happen, will be challenged as unconstitutional).

What is so hard for people to understand about that???

It makes no difference how many official releases you do or do not own (I own everything in multiple formats up through and including "Come" plus all protege stuff too, in case you're wondering... but it's irrelevant).

XxAxX said:

...if only...

undulatingacrobat said:

Well, what about that law?? are you going to give it to us soon or what?

undulatingacrobat said:

But you are still filling the real criminals pockets with lots of money and you KNOW it's illegal. Still, you are trying to justify that by saying you bought "everything" officially released. That still doesn't take away the principle of the matter that you shouldn't PAY for illegal material, especially when the artist clearly objects to it. Or to put it bluntly in your own words: "make sure what you are doing is legal first. Its not that hard."

--
[This message was edited Sat Jan 31 7:32:01 PST 2004 by Abrazo]

undulatingacrobat said:

Exactly. Why cry about something when the foundation was built on shakey ground? Everyone loves new music from their favorite artist true. But when "other" people are making money off of their product then that is theft. Pure and simple. Just because some people have a need to have something when they want it doesn't give them the right to flip the "act" of bootlegging to seem correct. Maybe their mamma's and pappa's gave them everything they wanted when they were young to spawn this unrealistic point of view. Are the bootleggers giving a share of their profit to Prince? Nope! How about the soundman? Nope! How about the other artist and musicians on the songs? Nope!
[This message was edited Sat Jan 31 8:22:12 PST 2004 by jojofran]