Community Chat

[Shorty2U]

It IS illegal so he is right. Will he get a million from them? No. And it is very hard now days with this stuff due to people recording at concerts. I remember a time when you could not take video cameras into concerts. Now of course there are cellphones that record so they gave up enforcing it.

[Mysterri]

On 1/28/2014 RainCityGirl said:

On 1/28/2014 Yuban3 said:

On 1/28/2014 sidsmom said:

Pearl Jam is of the same ilk. We had another thread about the this recently...Costco vs Tiffany. I was the only one defending Tiffany. This is the exact same thing...Prince has every right to sue. Companies, including those of one person (ie artists), work hard to get that level of reputation. Downloading concerts to the internet (Prince) & using a named brand (Tiffany) is just like walking in to a store & grabbing the money out of the cash register. Just because "someone doesn't need the money" is not a good reason....sorry, that won't hold up in court. Dress it up any way you want...it's just stealing...plain & simple. #teamprince. #teamtiffany

Agreed.

Remember when Napster went after people for file/song sharing without paying for it?

Napster was guilty of encouraging music file sharing illegally. It was Napster itself who ran into copyright infringement trouble. They didn't go after anyone; someone went after them.

I believe it was Metallica and it hurt them--financially and they lost a lot of fans. They went after kids along with adults.

[missy1]

He withdrew his suit, not totally. Tmz.

[Wild Cherry]

On 1/28/2014 Shorty2U said:

It IS illegal so he is right. Will he get a million from them? No. And it is very hard now days with this stuff due to people recording at concerts. I remember a time when you could not take video cameras into concerts. Now of course there are cellphones that record so they gave up enforcing it.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.