What is Digg?150 Comments
- JLGatsby, on 10/29/2007, -0/+88Serves him right before he thinks about dancing to a song without paying royalties!
- CornStarch, on 10/29/2007, -1/+72This why Prince used to call himself "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince"; because he doesn't own his name or music, the record company does.
- Bruno43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+68http://youtube.com/watch?v=N1KfJHFWlhQ
- tehbored, on 10/10/2007, -2/+62Take that *****!
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+63I hope she wins
- inactive, on 10/29/2007, -0/+48Can they confirm it's actually a song by Prince? I couldn't make out a damn note on that recording.
- hippykiller, on 10/10/2007, -5/+39I think I will go and download prince's entire catalog.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+35That kid looks so happy that he made me smile.
I hope he grows up to become a brilliant lawyer and takes down the RIAA and MPAA. - icepick314, on 10/10/2007, -0/+31didn't Prince gave out bunch of free cds in England through newspaper?
so i doubt HE cares who uses his music in a home video.... - jtorkbob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+29What's more important that teaching your children to stand up for what matters?
- NinjaPig, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21So i suppose if someone decides to enjoy their purchase in the public, its illegal or violates copyright?
wtf - nanboya, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21Really, how ***** stupid can the music companies be? Next thing you know, we'll be taking down pictures of people dancing at parties because, well, they MUST be playing music in the background to dance and that must be a copyright violation!
It's really not surprising that after almost 30 years of listening to music that I'm starting to get disillusioned with it as a form of entertainment. - sintaxi, on 10/29/2007, -2/+21well actually he did it as a loophole to make music out side of his contract. but you are almost right.
- siszam, on 10/10/2007, -4/+23Good for her. It seems like YouTube is very random in deciding what to pull and what to allow. I hope she wins.
- sselbor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16They're just upset 'cause the video's better than the song.
- sexybobo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Prince doesn't own all his music.
- Takuro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Nah, Universal has good reasons. Obviously people could rip an MP3 from this video since the audio is such a good quality.
[/end sarcasm] - Sp4nk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Like what? Post on Digg?
- zweben, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14I'll be sure to report you next time I hear you humming.
- Rupan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13I dont know though, they arent suing youtube, they are suing UMPG for their actions which could be viewed as indirectly effecting them. First off, if the video is 29 seconds long, doesnt that fall into the unspoken 30 seconds fair use policy? If this goes to trial and loses, this could be precedence to tighten up copywrite laws even more.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16Anything better than protecting herself and standing up for her rights when they are being trampled by a large corporation?
No, I don't she does. - memoBug, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Have no fear, EFF"s behind her and they eat crack legal squads for lunch.
- Tourney3p0, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8You sure did use a lot of words just to say "I know nothing whatsoever about US law and am therefore not even remotely suited to discuss the matter."
- Tourney3p0, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Prince doesn't own the music. Universal does. This is why he changed his name. Therefore he has no right whatsoever to send takedown notices.
In other words, you're spreading misinformed *****. It's Universal and only Universal. Even if Prince saw your ***** lounge act and decided it was damaging, there is nothing he could do. Universal calls the shots. - masgrada, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Yea, that's why he changed his name, because he was pissed at the recording industry for doing such things under in his name without his authorization. (well, that and a bunch of other crap they were doing he didn't like) The recent CD giveaway in england was a big F-U to them as well.
- purrp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I suspect the RIAA and MPAA will be dead (or irrelevant) long before that kid's old enough to graduate from law school.
I can only hope, anyway. - wibbly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Everyone please read some history.
Prince once appeared on stage with the word SLAVE written on his face, to point out that record companies were deliberately screwing with his releases.
He recently distributed hundreds of thousands of albums free with newspapers, causing his distributor to withdraw an album from sale.
I think he is on our side. - TheTaoOfBill, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8You are wrong. The tatics universal is using are known as bully tactics. They hold no legal ground whatsoever. Pretty much anyone who stands up to these tatics will win. Fair use protects this video as freedom of speech.
- CrazedGeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Don't copy that floppy?
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Free speech? That sounds like it'd fall under Ownership Rights. They own the website, ergo they decide policy.
- zjungleist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I watched the video, you can barely hear the music playing in the background.
- fantasticFlan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6What does this have to do with pirating?
- SPECOPS, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Well, the "Happy Birthday to you" song is making about US $2 million a year in royalties, I think the soon part is already here.
- mjhamilton, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8You can digg me down but that is an ugly baby... good dancing I guess... still, ugly baby.
- Alegoo92, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5It's the principal of the thing.
- fortezza, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Send him to jail to set an example. I mean, that will show how reasonable RIAA's position is, right? Right?
- TheLD, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Under 30 seconds and not making profit with the video is fair usage
- BlakeEM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2007_07.php#005376
- arnar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Do you think people will start believing you just because you say that again and again in as many threads as you can?
- fortezza, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6RIAA executive "the law is on our side, kid!" as he holds the kid to the subway tracks.
My name is not "kid", its "Neo"! as the kid smashes the agent into the ceiling. - Sil369, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I say all Diggers download or upload Prince's music (to youtube) just to piss off the RIAA.
- maffiou, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I agree with you that it sounds frivolous but if you look into it, it's not:
You film someone, there is music in the background, you're suppose to license the music, you film someone in front of a building, you may have to seek the architects permission as it may be copyrighted... You're not filming the building itself, it just happens to be in the background... and it's like that for everything...
To be honnest, that woman was actually doing them a favour, it should be seen as promotion. Personnally I hadn't heard the song in years and considered getting it from itune... Now I guess not anymore ! - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6It's called fairuse. Fool.
- Smegzor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5This is why I only download/listen to music by independent artists. All of it is released under Creative Commons and they don't ***** with the normalisation like the major labels do. Even better, I can talk directly to the artists on their own forums, download the samples they used and mix my own music (badly).
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Whats worse is Prince himself would back her up as he believe in Free Music PERIOD !! This crap with digital rights music shtit and people getting payed for using a song is getting way out of ***** hand....
Whats next Industry suing Karaoke for using and infringing a likeness to said songs that sound similar to certain product music therein ?
Whats next 5 yrs from now arrested for humming or whistling a tune in public ...sorry Fair Use means Fair use ...If she bought the tape back in the 80's when the Song was made than she should be be able to use it !! - Klowner, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4That's right, better roll up your car windows next time you decide to listen to a music CD, some pedestrian might hear part of it! The horror!
- Typhoon2009, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9While I think it's good that someone's standing up to ridiculous copyright laws, chances are she'll spend time and money getting decimated by the crack team of lawyers that major corporations have. All over a silly video.
- lhnz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Don't steal from somebody that gives Cds away for free?!?
- Kr4t05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3...is a two way street. This woman is merely doing the same thing that the various music and film producers have been doing for about 10 years now. I can't see how this is a "frivolous" lawsuit, when you consider the hundreds of lawsuits targeted at so-called "pirates" and "theives." Meanwhile, the industries themselves have been pillaging and stealing from artists and consumers alike.
- ramiro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3When I read "dancing toddler" I thought it was that detestable stinking animated dancing baby that used to show up in Ally McBeal.
Now I understand it is another copyright BS lawsuit from the music industry. -
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is