Princefams.com - Prince News and Pictures

FadedPhoto · 2010-03-06 04:22:37

A mom wins the right to have music playing in the background of her home movie. Seriously, didn't Universal Music have better things to do?

When Stephanie Lenz uploaded a video to YouTube of her little boy dancing his baby walker around the kitchen to the barely audible strains of Prince's "Let's Go Crazy," she couldn't have guessed she'd soon be in a legal battle that would last more than three years.

Since 2007, the mother of two has been going head-to-head with Universal Music Group over copyright infringement. The lawsuit was initiated when Universal demanded that YouTube take down Lenz's video. Instead, Lenz filed a lawsuit saying that her home movie was "self-evident non-infringing fair use."

Finally, Lenz and her son (who is, incidentally, no longer a baby) won the suit and will be getting their attorney fees repaid.

Please enjoy the video with no fear of being a party to crime:

Source: Momlogic.com -- March 2, 2010

purplefunklover · 2010-03-06 05:25:49

I thought it was no big deal that someone recorded a You-Tube video of their baby dancing to a Prince song. I also thought it was not good for business that they were told they would be sued if they did not remove the clip but it shows you what "times" we are in. Does it not?

Michelle0607 · 2010-03-06 06:03:34

Good 4 her...What a stupid law suit. They need to get a life.

Endre · 2010-03-06 06:07:43

It was clearly a bad move to sue that lady for making that video. I think it's really great that she won the case. I don't know if it's Prince, WB or Universal that's to blame in this case, but somehow I don't think it's a coincidence that this happened to Prince...
Call me a "hater" if you will, but I think the artist has a huge say in this.

Marie0124 · 2010-03-06 12:45:41

Suit for what:/

smilingjoe · 2010-03-06 15:48:07

maybe prince feels the record company have a duty to protect him and his music, it might seem/is petty but i know if you create something thats to provide you money with then you have the right for that creation to be protected. true this instant is stoopid and im sure allinvolved see it that way, its the same with pictures/fotos you need permission to reproduce and display unless you own the image, so whats the difference with music/music videos?

Pigg · 2010-03-06 23:08:14

smilingjoe wrote:
maybe prince feels the record company have a duty to protect him and his music, it might seem/is petty but i know if you create something thats to provide you money with then you have the right for that creation to be protected. true this instant is stoopid and im sure allinvolved see it that way, its the same with pictures/fotos you need permission to reproduce and display unless you own the image, so whats the difference with music/music videos?

I agree that in the whole all artists have the right to protect their property, but what happened here is the equivilant of several movie companies suing someone cos they make a holiday video outside of that famous chines theatre and all of the movie posters can be seen, it is simply ridiculous.

Pigg · 2010-03-06 23:09:31

purplefunklover wrote:
I thought it was no big deal that someone recorded a You-Tube video of their baby dancing to a Prince song. I also thought it was not good for business that they were told they would be sued if they did not remove the clip but it shows you what "times" we are in. Does it not?

no, it shows us what a total arrogant self obsessed prick Prince is.
no other artist has EVER brought a case like this to a YouTube member, its not the times we live in its the prick of an artist.