Tuesday, November 06, 2007

The Artist Once More Known As Prince


The Artist Once More Known As Prince may not actually be the person behind this attack against his own fan sites. I hope so, for otherwise it must be one of the dumbest moves in public relations ever.
Some of the fan sites are uniting.

I think even just legally he is on shaky ground here, to say the least. Normally the copyright to photos of a person belongs to the photographer, not the subject, and I doubt very much that Prince has bought the copyright to all the photos ever taken of him. And to assert that the copyright to tattoos of his likeness belongs to him is just plain idiotic.

TTL injected:
His case, if he has one, would be about trademark rights. Not copyright. He does own the trademark to his likeness. Registered or not.
The question is what constitutes a violation. Use of his likeness in news, encyclopaedia or documentary context? Probably not. Pushing a product or service based on or exploiting his likeness? Probably yes.

Hey, how come there's no Prince photo decorating your post? ;-)

You're quite right, I have corrected it now.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

it must be one of the dumbest moves in public relations since Tiananmen Square.

Should you be comparing this to Tiananmen Square?

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

Perhaps not.

Anonymous said...

Eolake said: "And to assert that the copyright to tattoos of his likeness belongs to him is just plain idiotic."

His case, if he has one, would be about trademark rights. Not copyright. He does own the trademark to his likeness. Registered or not.

The question is what constitutes a violation. Use of his likeness in news, encyclopaedia or documentary context? Probably not. Pushing a product or service based on or exploiting his likeness? Probably yes.

In any case. What a move from his purpleness!

Anonymous said...

Hey, how come there's no Prince photo decorating your post? ;-)

P. S. Same with the Big Udder post below.

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

If he's really behind it, I think his fans should boycott his royal super-lameness. End of story.

And if he's not, then he should swiftly file a complaint against whoever is causing this affair for dragging his friendly image in the mud like that.

Anonymous said...

Yo-yo-yo, hold your horsaz raht dere, mistah Stob! Ah mean, whassup wid' da Lybian, bro? Damn, ya got some nerve!

Mah client, the super-cool Prince, is hereby suin' your Danish ass in court, know what I'm sayin'? Coz you just infringed his rights of civic, copy, or whatever, by posting an image to his likeness on your here blog, see? So now, that you did the crime, you gotta do the time, and pay the dime, you dig?

Okay, so the lahkeness ain't so great, ah'll give you dat. In fact, it looks even more hansum' dan da original Prince of Pop. But it all don't matter, Pops, coz ya gone an' fessed yourself. Onna front page, no less.

Yo goose is cooked, yo, it's Thanksgivin' all over agin! When we're dun wit' yo, yo won't even have a shirt on yo back to dress your models. Word life!

See y'all in court, now. Mah uncle is da judge, jest so you know. Yo, Eo, don't fuhget to bring youe check-book, 'kay? So's we'll save sum time.

Anonymous said...

"Prince of Pop" hehe ... :-)

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

Yeah, I thought that was the other black guy, they one who is white.

Anonymous said...

No, he is the King! His son is called Prince, though.

Anonymous said...

And, he was married to the daughter of the king of rock'n'roll. But prince of pop he is not.

Actually, prince of pop is too lame a title for Rogers Nelson too. He is more like king of all genres, master of all instruments and disciplines.