Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by strumntheguitar on May 30, 2008 7:35:39 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - After word spread that Prince covered Radiohead's "Creep" at Coachella, the tens of thousands who couldn't be there ran to YouTube for a peek. Everyone was quickly denied — even Radiohead.
ADVERTISEMENT
All videos of Prince's unique rendition of Radiohead's early hit were quickly taken down, leaving only a message that his label, NPG Records, had removed the clips, claiming a copyright violation. But the posted videos were shot by fans and, obviously, the song isn't Prince's.
In a recent interview, Thom Yorke said he heard about Prince's performance from a text message and thought it was "hilarious." Yorke laughed when his bandmate, guitarist Ed O'Brien, said the blocking had prevented him from seeing Prince's version of their song.
"Really? He's blocked it?" asked Yorke, who figured it was their song to block or not. "Surely we should block it. Hang on a moment."
Yorke added: "Well, tell him to unblock it. It's our ... song."
YouTube prohibits the posting of copyrighted material. If the site receives a complaint from a copyright owner, it will in most cases remove the video(s). Whether the same could be done for a company not holding a copyright is less clear, but Yorke's argument would seem to bear some credence according to YouTube's policies. YouTube, which is owned by Google, declined to comment.
Prince also did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.
The dispute was an interesting twist in debates over digital ownership, held between two major acts with differing views on music and the Internet. Radiohead famously released their most recent album, "In Rainbows," as a digital download with optional pricing. They also have a channel on YouTube.
When Prince performed at the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival in Indio, Calif., on April 26, he prohibited the standard arrangement of allowing photographers to shoot near the stage during the first three songs of his set. Instead, he had a camera crew filming his performance.
Prince, who founded NPG Records in 1993, has been innovative when it comes to music distribution, too. He released his 1997 album, "Crystal Ball," on the Internet and in 2006 was awarded a lifetime achievement award by the Webbys. In 2007, he gave away copies of his disc "Planet Earth" in a British Sunday newspaper.
But the Purple One has also shut down his official Web site and in September of last year said he would sue YouTube and eBay for not filtering unauthorized content.
Prince fans have organized to urge him to relent in his legal fights to control images and photographs of himself. As of Thursday, the most popular YouTube clip about Prince playing "Creep" is an expletive-laden rant from Sam Conti Jr., who describes himself as a "former Prince fan."
*i like coconuts, you can break them open they smell like ladies lyin in the sun** *Hell I don't even know where I am** *for now I must sit here and ponder the yonder: The herbivores did well cause their food didn't never run** *We listen, if it feels good We shake** *You made a big impression for a girl of your size, Now I can't get by without you and your big brown eyes.**
Prince is Prince. He is a douche, and he is a fantastic and untouchable musician.
I think Prince's "image" is valuable enough to remove from Youtube if he desires. It may be Radiohead's song, but it is also Prince who is performing it....
I think this is a kind of ridiculous situation. I see both act's points, but think that this is just one of those things that, ultimately, copyright laws will prevail. Meaning that the video won't be available.
Edit: To clarify my stance: This lawsuit deal is stupid. Prince does need to lighten up, in all seriousness.
I think this is a kind of ridiculous situation. I see both act's points, but think that this is just one of those things that, ultimately, copyright laws will prevail. Meaning that the video won't be available.
Edit: To clarify my stance: This lawsuit deal is stupid. Prince does need to lighten up, in all seriousness.
I agree completely... It's possible that Prince will accept Radiohead's request but at the same time he really doesn't have to. He should, however, accept Radiohead's simple favor and just release this one video... I mean, [peter griffin]come on! Coommme oonnnnnnnnn![/peter griffin] ;D ;D
For some reason in this situation I can't help but picture Radiohead as portrayed on South Park... ;D
Post by stallion pt. 2 on May 31, 2008 11:30:07 GMT -5
Has it taken us this long to realize that Prince is fucking crazy? The Jehova's Witness thing wasn't enought to tip us off? Seriously, the guy is nuts. Still love his music, but he's fucking crazy.
John: We don't even understand our own music Spider: It doesn't, does it matter whether we understand it? At least it'll give us . . . strength John: I know but maybe we could get into it more if we understood it
CCRGMac
Showerless Shakedown Vendor Smire Felsgood, Attorney at Law
Post by GratefulHippie on May 31, 2008 12:30:20 GMT -5
maybe i'll be shunned for this, but i've never been a prince fan. i just can't get into him. and i don't care if he was the performer of the song or not. if he's arguing copyright, he's being one hell of a hypocrite considering he was playing another band's song.
he had no points to lose from me, but i definitely think less of him now.
"...when it comes to that fantastic note where the rabbit bites its own head off, I want you to throw that f**kin radio into the tub with me." -Dr. Gonzo, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
;D
&
