tranquility
Senior Member
As most or all who read this knows, Prince has died. I'm a bit sad. First, I hate people younger than I dying. Second, I am disappointed I will hear no new things from this creative genius. I can't say I'm a "fan" as music is not something I pay great attention to. Yet, whenever I hear one of his things on the radio, I don't hit the button to change it to something else. Well, except for today. Where I was driving in my car and hit the button got a Prince song and didn't like the next. So, I hit the button--where a Prince song. No, I'm done, hit the button and Prince. Repeated by all but two of the 15 buttons. WTH? Got back to the office and found out why. Pity.
From the little the news media let me know through the years, he was upright, reverent, thrifty and brave. I don't know if it is true or not. But, I suspect he was not found with a needle in his arm, naked and a dead hooker or a live boy in the elevator. I suspect he was a person who lived his live with the struggles we all have. Some are luckier than others. He may not have had some of the luck I had.
That being said, I almost titled the post "The artist formerly known as Prince". I would have used the "unpronounceable symbol", but don't have the font Warner sent out to all the entertainment news media. Do you know why that was important? Legal reasons. It had to do with contractual things and was part of a legal strategy to keep him from being a "slave". (Please don't get butthurt about the use of some terms without reading a bit about the issues here.) I think time and his theory may have won that battle.
As to more basic IP issues, P was incredibly hard core on creator's rights. That is why I feel it appropriate to write. He wanted the vagueness of the law to be decided in certain ways that benefit the artist. He certainly lost some revenue because of the stance so he is not a hypocrite. But, P is an example of a rich person who feels he truly invented something (In copyright over patent.) and that others should not "use" it in any way. (Use is in quotes as what is use can be difficult to define.) There are multiple suits over time. One that lasted in the courts for almost a decade had a decision of (Not exactly, look it up if you care.); yea, you should probably consider fair use before suing. I would say it is a loss to P's suit. Yet, we'll see. Another thing not done. A thing that may be less considered because now the issue is decided by a fiduciary and not one with core beliefs. Let's face it, a fiduciary is not going to push the law as the principal would have. Don't misunderstand, I think P was wrong. But, of all the creative artistes I've seen, he is the one that tried to push the law the farthest.
I am sad he died. I am sad he is no longer an advocate for a position I completely disagree with on intellectual property. He was truly creative, he made truly unique things, and he was willing to fight for IP law protections.
I know the world will be sad as the music stops. I believe the world should be sad because a moneyed interest with reasonable argument in theory and facts will no longer influence the law.
I understand my theory of what the law should be is more secure tonight. Yet, argument seems the best way to decide. Even without the loss of the talent, I morn the loss of the advocate.
From the little the news media let me know through the years, he was upright, reverent, thrifty and brave. I don't know if it is true or not. But, I suspect he was not found with a needle in his arm, naked and a dead hooker or a live boy in the elevator. I suspect he was a person who lived his live with the struggles we all have. Some are luckier than others. He may not have had some of the luck I had.
That being said, I almost titled the post "The artist formerly known as Prince". I would have used the "unpronounceable symbol", but don't have the font Warner sent out to all the entertainment news media. Do you know why that was important? Legal reasons. It had to do with contractual things and was part of a legal strategy to keep him from being a "slave". (Please don't get butthurt about the use of some terms without reading a bit about the issues here.) I think time and his theory may have won that battle.
As to more basic IP issues, P was incredibly hard core on creator's rights. That is why I feel it appropriate to write. He wanted the vagueness of the law to be decided in certain ways that benefit the artist. He certainly lost some revenue because of the stance so he is not a hypocrite. But, P is an example of a rich person who feels he truly invented something (In copyright over patent.) and that others should not "use" it in any way. (Use is in quotes as what is use can be difficult to define.) There are multiple suits over time. One that lasted in the courts for almost a decade had a decision of (Not exactly, look it up if you care.); yea, you should probably consider fair use before suing. I would say it is a loss to P's suit. Yet, we'll see. Another thing not done. A thing that may be less considered because now the issue is decided by a fiduciary and not one with core beliefs. Let's face it, a fiduciary is not going to push the law as the principal would have. Don't misunderstand, I think P was wrong. But, of all the creative artistes I've seen, he is the one that tried to push the law the farthest.
I am sad he died. I am sad he is no longer an advocate for a position I completely disagree with on intellectual property. He was truly creative, he made truly unique things, and he was willing to fight for IP law protections.
I know the world will be sad as the music stops. I believe the world should be sad because a moneyed interest with reasonable argument in theory and facts will no longer influence the law.
I understand my theory of what the law should be is more secure tonight. Yet, argument seems the best way to decide. Even without the loss of the talent, I morn the loss of the advocate.
