but how does photoshopping a magenta cock onto his face(as many have)
hurt his revenue stream from live performances? I don't see how he can claim damage to his livelihood due to fan sites posting his image, or indeed, headswaps with MsPaint.
(I know you're not prince's lawyer, just thinking out loud :)
(hurt his revenue stream from live performances? I don't see how he can claim damage to his livelihood due to fan sites posting his image, or indeed, headswaps with MsPaint.
(I know you're not prince's lawyer, just thinking out loud :)
The Alchemist king of the needlessly complicated,
Thu 15 Nov 2007, 2:05,
archived)
I guess it's a case of not knowing where to draw the line, so blanketing the whole thing as bad.When you draw a line of what you say is allowed you are always going to have a grey area. By saying 'nope, you're not allowed anything, you can all eff off' he makes it far easier in the future to collar anyone who is genuinely damaging his income, e.g. people selling extensive photographic or video recordings of his performances. It means being draconian now, but it gets much easier for him in the future because of this.
Again, I'm not saying he's going about it the right, but I can see a vague sense behind it. The revenue from selling records is falling for the musicians, and a new model does need to be found if there's going to be any future for bands making a living from their music. Prince's solution probably isn't the right way to solve the problem, but I can't blame him for trying to do something about it, because that's more than most of the industry.
(Again, I'm not saying he's going about it the right, but I can see a vague sense behind it. The revenue from selling records is falling for the musicians, and a new model does need to be found if there's going to be any future for bands making a living from their music. Prince's solution probably isn't the right way to solve the problem, but I can't blame him for trying to do something about it, because that's more than most of the industry.
Matazone has new icons, but is keeping this one,
Thu 15 Nov 2007, 2:16,
archived)
I agree that it makes perfect sense as a strategy for TAFKAP,I just don't think it can be on a firm legal standpoint to claim damages.
Unless he intends to sell images of himself, in which case posting an image on the web is limiting to that business.
I dunno.
(Unless he intends to sell images of himself, in which case posting an image on the web is limiting to that business.
I dunno.
The Alchemist king of the needlessly complicated,
Thu 15 Nov 2007, 2:20,
archived)
I can only assume that's part of what he wants to do, otherwise, as you say, it doesn't make much legal sense. Matazone has new icons, but is keeping this one,
Thu 15 Nov 2007, 2:26,
archived)