4 ms·

Prince himself used an image of Dave Chappelle disguised as Prince. Chappelle said this ‘That's a Prince judo move right there. … You make fun of Prince in a sk

Prince himself used an image of Dave Chappelle disguised as Prince. Chappelle said this ‘That's a Prince judo move right there. … You make fun of Prince in a sketch and he'll just use you in his album cover. … What am I going to do — sue him for using a picture of me dressed up like him? … That's checkmate right there.’ Ironically though, I’d argue what Prince did here was not fair use. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakfast_Can_Wait https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakfast_Can_Wait

6stringmerc 4y ago
It wasn't fair use in the least. It was up to Dave & probably Comedy Central and the bad press would've done damage - it was a great move from a marketing standpoint. Not that commercial nature is a block for proper fair use (see: Weird Al's album sales) but other arrangements are...less clear at first sight sometimes.
- zinekeller 4y ago
  > (see: Weird Al's album sales) Unfortunately, that's a bad example, since Weird Al always gets permission from the original artists/songwriters/composers as may be the case. For example, he scrapped parodies based on Lady Gaga's songs because she (or the record company?) denied his use, although it's available online (non-commercial distribution): https://alyankovic.wordpress.com/the-gaga-saga/ https://alyankovic.wordpress.com/the-gaga-saga/. Will he pass the four factors? He thinks so, but he still thinks it's a bit rude to not ask for permission.
  - ok_dad 4y ago
    Eventually, though, Lady Gaga herself approved that song. It was her manager that initially didn’t approve it (or at least her manager took the blame, heh).
MichaelCollins 4y ago
Prince was a well known prat, but this lawsuit is about what Andy Warhol did, not Prince. Prince's involvement in this case is only being the subject of the photograph. The lawsuit is between Lynn Goldsmith and Warhol's estate. The general hypocrisy / idiocy of Prince is completely irrelevant.
- bigmattystyles 4y ago
  I thought it was relevant and funny little anecdote
  - briandrum 4y ago
    That was obvious to me at least, and I appreciate that you shared it. Thanks!
- Maursault 4y ago
  > The general hypocrisy / idiocy of Prince Strictly speaking, Prince featuring an image of Dave Chapelle in parody of him on the cover of a single is neither hypocrisy nor idiocy. It is fundamentally one of many examples of self-parody, which is common among artists. While judgement as idiocy is highly subjective, Prince obviously put thought into what is far more accurately described as clever, but I don't see how it could in any way be hypocritical.
  - feet 4y ago
    I personally think it's hilarious and wonderful, if I were Dave I wouldn't see any reason to sue. It's honestly a great move

6stringmerc 4y ago

It wasn't fair use in the least. It was up to Dave & probably Comedy Central and the bad press would've done damage - it was a great move from a marketing standpoint. Not that commercial nature is a block for proper fair use (see: Weird Al's album sales) but other arrangements are...less clear at first sight sometimes.

zinekeller 4y ago
> (see: Weird Al's album sales) Unfortunately, that's a bad example, since Weird Al always gets permission from the original artists/songwriters/composers as may be the case. For example, he scrapped parodies based on Lady Gaga's songs because she (or the record company?) denied his use, although it's available online (non-commercial distribution): https://alyankovic.wordpress.com/the-gaga-saga/ https://alyankovic.wordpress.com/the-gaga-saga/. Will he pass the four factors? He thinks so, but he still thinks it's a bit rude to not ask for permission.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  Eventually, though, Lady Gaga herself approved that song. It was her manager that initially didn’t approve it (or at least her manager took the blame, heh).

MichaelCollins 4y ago

Prince was a well known prat, but this lawsuit is about what Andy Warhol did, not Prince. Prince's involvement in this case is only being the subject of the photograph. The lawsuit is between Lynn Goldsmith and Warhol's estate. The general hypocrisy / idiocy of Prince is completely irrelevant.

bigmattystyles 4y ago
I thought it was relevant and funny little anecdote
- briandrum 4y ago
  That was obvious to me at least, and I appreciate that you shared it. Thanks!
Maursault 4y ago
> The general hypocrisy / idiocy of Prince Strictly speaking, Prince featuring an image of Dave Chapelle in parody of him on the cover of a single is neither hypocrisy nor idiocy. It is fundamentally one of many examples of self-parody, which is common among artists. While judgement as idiocy is highly subjective, Prince obviously put thought into what is far more accurately described as clever, but I don't see how it could in any way be hypocritical.
- feet 4y ago
  I personally think it's hilarious and wonderful, if I were Dave I wouldn't see any reason to sue. It's honestly a great move