independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 15th Sep 2019 7:35pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Engineer Ordered to Pay $4M to Prince's Estate Over Unauthorized 'Deliverance' EP
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 4 <1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 04/09/19 9:54am

TheFreakerFant
astic

avatar

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-47866455

Last year, archivist Michael Howe told the BBC there was so much unreleased material to sort through that he had only been able to review "a small percentage" in the last two years.

"I can tell you this," he added. "Everything that I was hoping was in there is certainly in there and many multiples more.

"Things that were only even rumoured to exist or that were completely unknown to anybody but Prince and whatever engineer was involved in the session."

NOW GET ON WITH RELEASING IT PLEASE!!!!

[Edited 4/9/19 9:54am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 04/09/19 10:19am

donnyenglish

TheFreakerFantastic said:

All I say is thanks Ian for releasing it, it was a real comfort to hear genuine 'new' music a year after P's death. The Deliverence EP was actually very good.

I think the amount, 4m is rather excessive, i doubt it could have made that much, also I think Ian's intentions were not purely selfish but altruistic, knowing the fans were desperate for music the estate weren't releasing.

However, the estate shouldn't crow about winning this but forgive him, get him on board and maybe he can help them engineer the Vault sessions. The estate need to get their act in order. If they had then we wouldn't need to rely on bootleggers or Ian to do their job for them! Releasing P&M last year was a cyncial cash in exercise with minimal effort put in. Compare what the estate have released to what Bowie's estate has released already! Even Dylan has an amazing set of releases and he's not even dead yet. I know people will say, yes it's the estate, it's legal stuff, but come on it's nearly 3 damn years now!

No more stuff we already heard but new stuff from the vault. 1999 DELUXE with a full disc of unreleased gems would be a start!

'Leggers if you're listening, please fill in the gaps with some 'new' music. 2015, 2016 and 2017 were a feast of unreleased gems but since then it all seems to have gone dead now?!

[Edited 4/9/19 9:49am]

Co-sign on all of the above.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 04/09/19 10:32am

Krystalkisses

avatar

donnyenglish said:



Krystalkisses said:


donnyenglish said:

This is too bad. I respect him for releasing it, but I don't like that he altered it. Prince gave the record companies and the Estate an invisible deed. They are spending almost as much money as they are making trying to profit off of his work. He left a complicated web for a reason. This is all by design. p>



I never thought about it this way before but I think you are right. He was a very intelligent man and not haphazard about anything. It makes sense to me now.




Universal, Warner Brothers and others got invisible deeds. When they tried to cash in, they didn't own what they thought they owned. He appreciated the fact that he had multiple vaults in disarray and that some of the material was literally deteriorating and it would cost a lot of money to organize and restore. Prince was not going to spend his life fighitng against the industry profiting from his work and have it all be for nothing after he passed. Thus far, the industry has not generated much profit from his work. That is pure genius and by design.



Damn, Checkmate.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 04/09/19 2:56pm

PurpleBlackmon

I wouldn't pay it.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 04/09/19 3:06pm

onlyforaminute

That a helluva deterrent.
Year of Return 2019
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 04/09/19 3:28pm

ludwig

RodeoSchro said:


So, Boxhill .....

... if Boxhill loses, ...

... and if Boxhill doesn't have .....

His name is Boxill, George Ian Boxill.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 04/09/19 3:58pm

tump

Engineer deserves 0.00

Prince estate deserves 0.00

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 04/09/19 4:28pm

Electrostar

avatar

So Prince recorded this fantastic album in 2006 and never did anything with it? Just left it with this guy Boxill. I would have thought Prince would have finished it at least. Strange.
Get up, come on let's do something.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 04/09/19 9:33pm

databank

avatar

Electrostar said:

So Prince recorded this fantastic album in 2006 and never did anything with it? Just left it with this guy Boxill. I would have thought Prince would have finished it at least. Strange.

Prince recorded those songs in 2006 and for all we know he may have considered them finished as they were. There's a shitload of material in the vault that he hasn't done anything with, those tracks are just a few among many.

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 04/09/19 11:01pm

RODSERLING

databank said:



TheEnglishGent said:




databank said:



I can't remember a post you wrote that wasn't about sales lol


Why are you so obsessed with records sales? It's your right and it's cool, we all have our little obsessions, but it's an unusual one so I'd be really curious to know why eek




I think the point Rod was making was that the money earned from those high profile releases wouldn't have amounted to $4,000,000 yet they are claiming for that amount against the Deliverance EP.



I know but even if we were discussing, IDK, Prince's wardrobe or diet, ROD would still manage to slip in a reference to sales lol



I just made a logical assumption based on the absurd money the estate is claiming.
This is completely on topic.

I think you are obsessed with me and my posts. You already asked me that kind of question, and I already asked you.
If the answers don't satisfy you, why keep on asking?

Moreover I think you don't see everyone of my posts to assume that it s all about sales lol
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 04/09/19 11:10pm

RODSERLING

BartVanHemelen said:



RODSERLING said:


4 millions ? Thé estate can't even sell 100.000 copies of PR deluxe or Piano 1983 worldwide, and they want 4 millions?

.


Because you gotta scare other chancers who were planning to do the same.



I disagree.
If they want to discourage other people to leak unreleased tracks, well, the estate just has to release them, or at least planning to do so.


They had nothing else to do than go to court and asking millions to laymen who leak unreleased tracks instead of actually releasing them.
It shows how much they are stupid and doesn't understand anything about what the audience wants.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 04/09/19 11:39pm

databank

avatar

RODSERLING said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Because you gotta scare other chancers who were planning to do the same.

I disagree. If they want to discourage other people to leak unreleased tracks, well, the estate just has to release them, or at least planning to do so. They had nothing else to do than go to court and asking millions to laymen who leak unreleased tracks instead of actually releasing them. It shows how much they are stupid and doesn't understand anything about what the audience wants.

A is A cannot be B or C. This has nothing to do with that. We are here discussing the Boxill case which is very different from the Eye case.

.

Ian Boxill didn't leak anything. He tried to appropriate a Prince/Estate intellectual property and sell it openly to the general public for a profit. This has nothing to do with leaks, or even bootleg labels. The Estate had no choice but to take it to court.

.

And when it comes to bootlegs and the "filling a void" argument, bootlegs are often tolerated by artists because of their confidential nature and the fact that they don't claim ownership of the recordings, but they don't have to be tolerated. And even if the Estate released as much material as we wish they did, what do you think Eye or their successors would do when they'd find a new tape? Not release it because there's already too much out there, when they know Prince fans are compulsory collectors who want everything? No way.

.

Unless the Estate uploads everything that's in the vault -every single tape studio live rehearsal or otherwise- on a website overnight, which they can't, won't and shouldn't do, and as long as unreleased tapes circulate among collectors, there will always be a market for bootlegs.

.

Back to Boxill, I actually don't understand how he and his label thought for a single second they could get away with this: just imagine them attempting it while Prince was alive!

.

Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 04/10/19 12:19am

Electrostar

avatar

databank said:



Electrostar said:


So Prince recorded this fantastic album in 2006 and never did anything with it? Just left it with this guy Boxill. I would have thought Prince would have finished it at least. Strange.

Prince recorded those songs in 2006 and for all we know he may have considered them finished as they were. There's a shitload of material in the vault that he hasn't done anything with, those tracks are just a few among many.



Has a record of what is in the vault been made public?
Get up, come on let's do something.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 04/10/19 1:14am

databank

avatar

Electrostar said:

databank said:

Prince recorded those songs in 2006 and for all we know he may have considered them finished as they were. There's a shitload of material in the vault that he hasn't done anything with, those tracks are just a few among many.

Has a record of what is in the vault been made public?

Unfortunately not. It's likely the inventory is far from complete anyway.

So far what is known to exist (with the exception of rehearsals) is listed on Princevault.com

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 04/10/19 1:38am

RODSERLING

databank said:



RODSERLING said:


BartVanHemelen said:


.


Because you gotta scare other chancers who were planning to do the same.



I disagree. If they want to discourage other people to leak unreleased tracks, well, the estate just has to release them, or at least planning to do so. They had nothing else to do than go to court and asking millions to laymen who leak unreleased tracks instead of actually releasing them. It shows how much they are stupid and doesn't understand anything about what the audience wants.

A is A cannot be B or C. This has nothing to do with that. We are here discussing the Boxill case which is very different from the Eye case.


.


Ian Boxill didn't leak anything. He tried to appropriate a Prince/Estate intellectual property and sell it openly to the general public for a profit. This has nothing to do with leaks, or even bootleg labels. The Estate had no choice but to take it to court.


.


And when it comes to bootlegs and the "filling a void" argument, bootlegs are often tolerated by artists because of their confidential nature and the fact that they don't claim ownership of the recordings, but they don't have to be tolerated. And even if the Estate released as much material as we wish they did, what do you think Eye or their successors would do when they'd find a new tape? Not release it because there's already too much out there, when they know Prince fans are compulsory collectors who want everything? No way.


.


Unless the Estate uploads everything that's in the vault -every single tape studio live rehearsal or otherwise- on a website overnight, which they can't, won't and shouldn't do, and as long as unreleased tapes circulate among collectors, there will always be a market for bootlegs.


.


Back to Boxill, I actually don't understand how he and his label thought for a single second they could get away with this: just imagine them attempting it while Prince was alive!


.


Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.



So we agree this is way disproportionate.
They should only ask him the money he made from it, and maybe some thousand dollars more.
Between you and me, how many copies of the Lzp did he sell ?
2000? 3000 max?

And they should hurry up to make the vault available instead of wasting their time ruining the only people willing to buy Prince s release.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 04/10/19 2:03am

databank

avatar

RODSERLING said:

databank said:

A is A cannot be B or C. This has nothing to do with that. We are here discussing the Boxill case which is very different from the Eye case.

.

Ian Boxill didn't leak anything. He tried to appropriate a Prince/Estate intellectual property and sell it openly to the general public for a profit. This has nothing to do with leaks, or even bootleg labels. The Estate had no choice but to take it to court.

.

And when it comes to bootlegs and the "filling a void" argument, bootlegs are often tolerated by artists because of their confidential nature and the fact that they don't claim ownership of the recordings, but they don't have to be tolerated. And even if the Estate released as much material as we wish they did, what do you think Eye or their successors would do when they'd find a new tape? Not release it because there's already too much out there, when they know Prince fans are compulsory collectors who want everything? No way.

.

Unless the Estate uploads everything that's in the vault -every single tape studio live rehearsal or otherwise- on a website overnight, which they can't, won't and shouldn't do, and as long as unreleased tapes circulate among collectors, there will always be a market for bootlegs.

.

Back to Boxill, I actually don't understand how he and his label thought for a single second they could get away with this: just imagine them attempting it while Prince was alive!

.

Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.

So we agree this is way disproportionate. They should only ask him the money he made from it, and maybe some thousand dollars more. Between you and me, how many copies of the Lzp did he sell ? 2000? 3000 max? And they should hurry up to make the vault available instead of wasting their time ruining the only people willing to buy Prince s release.

Seems totally disproportionate, of course. Unless Ian Boxill is a multimillionaire, I would even go as far as to say it's outrageous. You shouldn't be able to ruin a man's life over copyright infringement.

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 04/10/19 2:42am

jcurley

donnyenglish said:



Krystalkisses said:


donnyenglish said:

This is too bad. I respect him for releasing it, but I don't like that he altered it. Prince gave the record companies and the Estate an invisible deed. They are spending almost as much money as they are making trying to profit off of his work. He left a complicated web for a reason. This is all by design. p>



I never thought about it this way before but I think you are right. He was a very intelligent man and not haphazard about anything. It makes sense to me now.




Universal, Warner Brothers and others got invisible deeds. When they tried to cash in, they didn't own what they thought they owned. He appreciated the fact that he had multiple vaults in disarray and that some of the material was literally deteriorating and it would cost a lot of money to organize and restore. Prince was not going to spend his life fighitng against the industry profiting from his work and have it all be for nothing after he passed. Thus far, the industry has not generated much profit from his work. That is pure genius and by design.



Its sabitage but i hope you're right. To think thus mess has some methid cheers ne up a bit. Poor Prince
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 04/10/19 3:23am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

RODSERLING said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Because you gotta scare other chancers who were planning to do the same.

I disagree. If they want to discourage other people to leak unreleased tracks, well, the estate just has to release them, or at least planning to do so. They had nothing else to do than go to court and asking millions to laymen who leak unreleased tracks instead of actually releasing them. It shows how much they are stupid and doesn't understand anything about what the audience wants.

.

No, it is called "protecting your copyrights" and it basically requires them to take such drastic action.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 04/10/19 3:31am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

databank said:

Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.

.

The estate had to spend time and effort and money to squash this ridiculous case, simply because some chancer decided to pretend he didn't know what his contract with Prince entailed. This dude openly defied copyright laws. There was no way he was going to get off with a slap on the wrist; he was going to be made an example of. The estate knows damn well there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of such recordings out there, and if they let this one slide the floodgates will open. Boxill isn't some naive guy, he's worked in the business for ages and he should have known that what he was doing was wildly illegal.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 04/10/19 3:33am

Kares

avatar

databank said:

RODSERLING said:

databank said: So we agree this is way disproportionate. They should only ask him the money he made from it, and maybe some thousand dollars more. Between you and me, how many copies of the Lzp did he sell ? 2000? 3000 max? And they should hurry up to make the vault available instead of wasting their time ruining the only people willing to buy Prince s release.

Seems totally disproportionate, of course. Unless Ian Boxill is a multimillionaire, I would even go as far as to say it's outrageous. You shouldn't be able to ruin a man's life over copyright infringement.

.

You guys seem to think that the sum awarded to the Estate must be directly linked to the money Boxill made with the bootleg. It is NOT, that is not how copyright infringement damages are awarded by law. The profit made by the infringer is only one of the factors taken into consideration. There are other factors: actual damages and statutory damages too.

.

Furthermore: read the article, the award is not 4 million, it is 3 million dollars. The added almost 1 million is legal fees related to the case. Still of course 3 million is a big sum, but again, don't forget that it's not for one song, it is for several tracks. (OK, we know it's basically 2 songs as 'Man Opera' is just cut up into its segments, but the Estate's lawyers obviously counted them separately and you can't really blame them.) Also, the release was to be distributed worldwide, through several different channels. These are all factors that multiply the claim for damages.
.
Boxill was totally out of his mind to assume he could get away with putting this out, and he even had the nerve to claim co-authorship and co-ownership. He's a professional who's been working in the business for many years so he knew what he was doing.
And no, his life is not ruined – even if he's unable to pay he can file for bankruptcy.
.

Friends don't let friends clap on 1 and 3.

The Paisley Park Vault spreadsheet: https://goo.gl/zzWHrU
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 04/10/19 3:37am

Kares

avatar

BartVanHemelen said:

databank said:

Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.

.

The estate had to spend time and effort and money to squash this ridiculous case, simply because some chancer decided to pretend he didn't know what his contract with Prince entailed. This dude openly defied copyright laws. There was no way he was going to get off with a slap on the wrist; he was going to be made an example of. The estate knows damn well there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of such recordings out there, and if they let this one slide the floodgates will open. Boxill isn't some naive guy, he's worked in the business for ages and he should have known that what he was doing was wildly illegal.

.

Exactly.

Friends don't let friends clap on 1 and 3.

The Paisley Park Vault spreadsheet: https://goo.gl/zzWHrU
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 04/10/19 3:58am

sulls

avatar

Thankfully these made it out. It really is a FANTASTIC collection. The new 'black album' for this age.

"I like to watch."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 04/10/19 5:03am

McD

avatar

Oh man, this is a tough one. I think we’re all just about on the same page here.

1. Boxill made a massive mistake thinking he could get away with this.
2. The Estate were practically obligated to sue him.
3. The cash portion of the ruling seems more than excessive, especially as it can’t ever be paid. (Just as there are implications for the Estate not taking legal action, the implications of Boxill paying this are just as frightening)

And last, but not least...

4. In the three years since we’ve lost Prince, this has been the best release by far.

For those keeping score:

Those who had access to EVERYTHING but chose to give us Piano & A Microphone ‘83: +$4m

Those who had access to DELIVERANCE and gave us DELIVERANCE: -$4m
[Edited 4/10/19 6:28am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 04/10/19 5:09am

Electrostar

avatar

Great publicity for Prince's unreleased vault creations.

Get up, come on let's do something.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 04/10/19 6:37am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

McD said:

Oh man, this is a tough one. I think we’re all just about on the same page here. 1. Boxill made a massive mistake thinking he could get away with this.

.

A "mistake"? He "accidentally" remixed these tracks and recorded additional music etc. and then packaged it for release and sold it online and distributed it to streaming platforms?

.


For those keeping score: Those who had access to EVERYTHING but chose to give us Piano & A Microphone ‘83

.

I have no doubt that behind the scenes there's an ugly battle being fought over the rights of the contents of the vault. I've been saying for years that Prince left a complicated legal mess and you lot keep pretending that it's merely the estate being asses.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 04/10/19 6:39am

RodeoSchro

avatar

ludwig said:

RodeoSchro said:


So, Boxhill .....

... if Boxhill loses, ...

... and if Boxhill doesn't have .....

His name is Boxill, George Ian Boxill.



Sorry, thanks. I'll correct it.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 04/10/19 6:53am

jdcxc

BartVanHemelen said:



databank said:



Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.



.


The estate had to spend time and effort and money to squash this ridiculous case, simply because some chancer decided to pretend he didn't know what his contract with Prince entailed. This dude openly defied copyright laws. There was no way he was going to get off with a slap on the wrist; he was going to be made an example of. The estate knows damn well there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of such recordings out there, and if they let this one slide the floodgates will open. Boxill isn't some naive guy, he's worked in the business for ages and he should have known that what he was doing was wildly illegal.



Well put. His actions were crazy irresponsible.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 04/10/19 6:58am

jdcxc

“I have no doubt that behind the scenes there's an ugly battle being fought over the rights of the contents of the vault. I've been saying for years that Prince left a complicated legal mess and you lot keep pretending that it's merely the estate being asses.”

Please explain.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 04/10/19 8:20am

databank

avatar

BartVanHemelen said:



databank said:



Now if you ask me whether I believe it's OK to fine a regular person 4M: no, I don't. Unless Ian Boxill is a millionaire or made those 4 millions from the release during the 24 hours it was available, I think such rulings are outrageous because you're basically destroying a man's life, and I don't think any copyright infringement is worth that. But that's a problem with the US laws and justice system, not the plaintiff.



.


The estate had to spend time and effort and money to squash this ridiculous case, simply because some chancer decided to pretend he didn't know what his contract with Prince entailed. This dude openly defied copyright laws. There was no way he was going to get off with a slap on the wrist; he was going to be made an example of. The estate knows damn well there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of such recordings out there, and if they let this one slide the floodgates will open. Boxill isn't some naive guy, he's worked in the business for ages and he should have known that what he was doing was wildly illegal.


It's not about that, of course he was wrong and he should have known (or knew), it's about punishment being proportionate. He didn't kill someone, he just stole something.
A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 04/10/19 8:22am

databank

avatar

Kares said:



databank said:




RODSERLING said:


databank said: So we agree this is way disproportionate. They should only ask him the money he made from it, and maybe some thousand dollars more. Between you and me, how many copies of the Lzp did he sell ? 2000? 3000 max? And they should hurry up to make the vault available instead of wasting their time ruining the only people willing to buy Prince s release.

Seems totally disproportionate, of course. Unless Ian Boxill is a multimillionaire, I would even go as far as to say it's outrageous. You shouldn't be able to ruin a man's life over copyright infringement.



.


You guys seem to think that the sum awarded to the Estate must be directly linked to the money Boxill made with the bootleg. It is NOT, that is not how copyright infringement damages are awarded by law. The profit made by the infringer is only one of the factors taken into consideration. There are other factors: actual damages and statutory damages too.


.


Furthermore: read the article, the award is not 4 million, it is 3 million dollars. The added almost 1 million is legal fees related to the case. Still of course 3 million is a big sum, but again, don't forget that it's not for one song, it is for several tracks. (OK, we know it's basically 2 songs as 'Man Opera' is just cut up into its segments, but the Estate's lawyers obviously counted them separately and you can't really blame them.) Also, the release was to be distributed worldwide, through several different channels. These are all factors that multiply the claim for damages.
.
Boxill was totally out of his mind to assume he could get away with putting this out, and he even had the nerve to claim co-authorship and co-ownership. He's a professional who's been working in the business for many years so he knew what he was doing.
And no, his life is not ruined – even if he's unable to pay he can file for bankruptcy.
.


Out of his mind indeed. I agree.
Well, I hope you're right about his life not being ruined.
A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 4 <1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Engineer Ordered to Pay $4M to Prince's Estate Over Unauthorized 'Deliverance' EP