Could this be the worst hip-hop song of all time?

[Casey]

[YOUTUBE]r6SNga4TF1k[/YOUTUBE]

This is without a doubt, the biggest pile of garbage I have ever heard.

Some idiot moron fuckstain jizzguzzler who goes by the highly original, intellectually stimulating, profoundly poetic name of "Yo Gotti", has taken one of the greatest songs of all time, 'Purple Rain' - Prince's ode to redemption and spirituality, and reduced it to a piss-poor, Casio-keyboard-sounding, pathetic, juvenile, over-autotuned dedication to Colombian product, named "Pure Cocaine" (see what he did there? It almost rhymes! What a talent!).

I hope this moron rots.

Please, Prince, I implore you to sue this guy for every penny he has for being such a fucking douchebag. Please do it.

 

[Dogmatic187]

OMG, hahahaha. The fucking T-Pain synth did it for me, what a piece of fucking trash, Jesus. There's no way Prince signed off on this, no fucking way.


Now if Lil Wayne did this, yes. It would be.

 

[Devious]

well considering that the song has been out for a while now, did the thought occur to you that he got permission to sample the song? and i wonder if you would think this was the worst song ever if it didn't sample your beloved Prince. it's not good, i'll give you that, but worst hip-hop song ever? not even close.

 

[Casey]

There's no way Prince signed off on this, no fucking way.

It's because of ass-clowns like this, that when a legitimately good hip-hop song with a Prince sample comes along, like the OG of 'Pac's Life', he doesn't want to allow the use of the sample.

That might be a bad example since Amaru didn't even bother trying to clear it, but the underlying point is still valid.

 

[Devious]

well this is what i'm wondering: i don't know enough about Prince to be sure of his situation with record companies, but wouldn't the record company that released Purple Rain own the rights to the song? in which case they wouldn't need to get Prince's permission, they would have to get the record company's approval. like i said, i don't know enough about Prince to know if he owns the rights to his own songs, but in 99.9% of cases, the record company owns the rights to the music, not the artist/s themselves.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

man this is a boring song. im doin my bit, making this statement and closing the tab!

song is wacker than wack!

 

[Devious]

this may not be the right thread to bring this up in, but i have to say it seems Prince can be way over the top when it comes to what he considers copyright infringement. 2 incidents in particular come to mind. in the first one he demanded that youtube remove a video that had been posted of a 13-month old baby bouncing around, and the song "let's Go Crazy" is playing in the background. Prince himself actually got sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation for that one. then, after he performed a live cover of Radiohead's song Creep, he demanded youtube remove videos of the performance posted by fans. ThomYorke of Radiohead, after hearing of this, is quoted as saying" Well tell him to unblock it. it's our... song." i can understand wanting to control the use of songs to which you have rights over, but having youtube remove video of a cover of a song he has no rights to is beyond ridiculous. i give the dude respect for being a great musician and artist, but you know he's going overboard when his own fans start a website to protest his actions lol.

 

[Dogmatic187]

this may not be the right thread to bring this up in, but i have to say it seems Prince can be way over the top when it comes to what he considers copyright infringement. 2 incidents in particular come to mind. in the first one he demanded that youtube remove a video that had been posted of a 13-month old baby bouncing around, and the song "let's Go Crazy" is playing in the background. Prince himself actually got sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation for that one. then, after he performed a live cover of Radiohead's song Creep, he demanded youtube remove videos of the performance posted by fans. ThomYorke of Radiohead, after hearing of this, is quoted as saying" Well tell him to unblock it. it's our... song."

I have to agree with you on those, that shit is ridiculous, especially with trying to remove a cover of someone else's song, that makes no fucking sense. But he would be all sorts of right in trying to get that piece of dinsoaur shit "Pure Cocaine" removed from existence. It sounds like a serious attempt at what should be a Dave Chappelle sketch.

 

[Devious]

hmmm, but if it was a good song it would be okay to sample Prince? ok, but isn't musical taste subjective? most people i know love Pac's "Pac's Life" OG and would hate this "Pure Cocaine" song but surprisingly enough i would bet there are more than a few who do like this song. but it seems like yours' and Caseys' argument for Prince to go after the guy is because YOU PERSONALLY don't like the song. shouldn't he go after anybody using his songs illegally, whether they are good or not?

 

[Dogmatic187]

hmmm, but if it was a good song it would be okay to sample Prince? ok, but isn't musical taste subjective? most people i know love Pac's "Pac's Life" OG and would hate this "Pure Cocaine" song but surprisingly enough i would bet there are more than a few who do like this song. but it seems like yours' and Caseys' argument for Prince to go after the guy is because YOU PERSONALLY don't like the song. shouldn't he go after anybody using his songs illegally, whether they are good or not?

He's going too and he should, but good cases of where a sample is used is going to get the same treatment of when it was used, raped and mangled into an excuse for a song. So because The OG of "Pac's Life" was good, it's still gonna get thrown in with crap like "Pure Cocaine" because of it's illegal sampling. The bad shit ruins it for the good, but all in all any song should get the clearing of a sample, and Prince probably isn't going to allow it.

 

[roaches]

Prince fans always make me laugh. I'll never understand how they can ride so hard for someone who disrespects them so often.

Did Yo Gotti actually make this beat or was it handed to him by another producer? I think the irateness is misplaced here.

 

[Preach]

I think Prince is just really eccentric. He's a control freak when it comes to his own music. The compulsive obsessive disorder kind.

 

[Kadafi Son]

I'm ashamed of this song

 

[Casey]

Prince has to sign off on any sample of his work, period. It doesn't matter that Warner Brothers own the rights to the recorded song, it's still his intellectual property and he HAS to allow it. Which is why, thankfully, this garbage Yo Gotti bullshit will never make it past a mixtape.

roaches - Prince has never personally disrespected me. In fact, when I met him last year he was nothing but friendly. I don't get what you mean about him disrespecting fans. He has every right to do whatever the fuck he wants to do with his art, on every level.

When he started the suing and the pulling of things from YouTube, I supported him, unlike other fans. As an artist I can see where he's coming from. People are quick to bring up that whole video of the baby dancing to 'Let's Go Crazy' incident, but people make it seem like Prince himself demanded that the video be pulled, when that simply isn't the case, he hired a company called "Web Sheriff", gave them guidelines as to what he didn't want to see on the internet regarding his own work, and they pulled all those things down and continue to do so. The baby video, and the Radiohead cover just happened to fall into that category.

 

[ibnycsteez]

its like when they used MLK for a credit card commercial or somthing.

because of this song im posting a thread on the vocoder aka dvp-1.

didnt really bother mi that much tho, it made mi say "thas stupid" n chuckle but i tend to appreciate these parody type tracks tho.

the most funny ever to mi was elephantman's "we bun down gay guys" thats made to sound just like outcast's "?im sorry mis jackson?". i was in the atl wen that dropped n it was in heavy ass rotation for like a year or something.

the thing that did pop in my mind tho bout what bothered mi recently was the album (mixtape?) "the carter II" (lil wayne?).
it has a 3-4 year old black boy in a zoot suit with tats on his face. that shit mad mi kinda sad. anybody else get that from it?

 

[Devious]

Prince has to sign off on any sample of his work, period. It doesn't matter that Warner Brothers own the rights to the recorded song, it's still his intellectual property and he HAS to allow it. Which is why, thankfully, this garbage Yo Gotti bullshit will never make it past a mixtape.

roaches - Prince has never personally disrespected me. In fact, when I met him last year he was nothing but friendly. I don't get what you mean about him disrespecting fans. He has every right to do whatever the fuck he wants to do with his art, on every level.

When he started the suing and the pulling of things from YouTube, I supported him, unlike other fans. As an artist I can see where he's coming from. People are quick to bring up that whole video of the baby dancing to 'Let's Go Crazy' incident, but people make it seem like Prince himself demanded that the video be pulled, when that simply isn't the case, he hired a company called "Web Sheriff", gave them guidelines as to what he didn't want to see on the internet regarding his own work, and they pulled all those things down and continue to do so. The baby video, and the Radiohead cover just happened to fall into that category.

yeah, but what do you think those guidelines were? if you see anything with my image or my music, take it down. the baby video was ridiculous because it was just a song being played in the background, it's not like the person was doing anything with the song. but it's at least somewhat understandable. the Radiohead thing isn't understandable at all. it's not his song to have rights over in the first place, and when even the people whose song it is don't want it removed, i think you should respect their wishes and leave it up.

i don't see how you can say it isn't Prince who took these things down, it was the company he hired. that's like saying that the Iraq invasion wasn't Bush's fault, it was the military that did the invasion, not him. he is in charge of the military and they follow his orders, just like this Web Sheriff company was following Prince's orders. i can understand if someone is using your songs in a bad way, but even fan-made tribute videos by fans who love him have been taken down. there is nothing wrong with trying to protect your own intellectual property rights, but there's a line you shouldn't cross. this is right up there with Metallica suing its own fans over the Napster bullshit. they have a right to do it, yes, but doing it caused them to drop whole levels of respect with their fans.

 

[Casey]

yeah, but what do you think those guidelines were? if you see anything with my image or my music, take it down. the baby video was ridiculous because it was just a song being played in the background, it's not like the person was doing anything with the song. but it's at least somewhat understandable. the Radiohead thing isn't understandable at all. it's not his song to have rights over in the first place, and when even the people whose song it is don't want it removed, i think you should respect their wishes and leave it up.

i don't see how you can say it isn't Prince who took these things down, it was the company he hired. that's like saying that the Iraq invasion wasn't Bush's fault, it was the military that did the invasion, not him. he is in charge of the military and they follow his orders, just like this Web Sheriff company was following Prince's orders. i can understand if someone is using your songs in a bad way, but even fan-made tribute videos by fans who love him have been taken down. there is nothing wrong with trying to protect your own intellectual property rights, but there's a line you shouldn't cross. this is right up there with Metallica suing its own fans over the Napster bullshit. they have a right to do it, yes, but doing it caused them to drop whole levels of respect with their fans.

How exactly are the people at Web Sheriff supposed to know that 'Creep' is a Radiohead song and Prince was only covering it? They were just doing their job.

Besides which, I don't even agree with Radiohead's stance. It might be their song but they don't own the rights to a Prince performance of it. It's still a video of Prince performing, on YouTube, which he doesn't want.

Anyway, the rumor is that Prince may release a DVD of the Coachella gig. So having all the vids pulled of that gig from YouTube makes total sense. Why should YouTube benefit from it? Their entire popularity comes from pirate copyrighted material and that's the stance that Prince is taking, along with others. YouTube will get majorly fucked in the ass sooner or later.

People may not agree, but I think it should be up to the artist to decide how and where they are portrayed. Prince has his reasons and people need to respect them. Otherwise they are not respecting him, it's just take take take and no give.

As for your Bush analogy, it doesn't really work. Sure, overall, the Iraq invasion is his fault, but if I few mistakes were made by individuals because of ambiguities in the overall guidelines, you can't say that is his explicit fault. Is it Bush's fault if American servicemen are abusive to prisoners of war? No.

 

[Devious]

i do agree that it should be up to the artist to decide these things, but the artist also has to realize that there is the possibility of alienating his fans by doing so. it's like the Metallica thing i mentioned. Metallica were perfectly within their rights to sue people for uploading and downloading their songs, and that was their stance, they were just doing what they thought was right as it pertains to copyrights. the fans, however had a completely different view of it. they felt that this money-making machine of a band was just being greedy. was that true? maybe, maybe not, but it is the fans' perception of an artist and their actions that are important, since the fans are the ones making them the money in the first place. even if you're doing the right thing, alienating your fans by essentially telling them how they can use your art is never a good move.

and you missed the point on the Bush analogy. is it his fault if servicemen abuse the prisoners? maybe not, but since he is the leader of the military, the responsibility of not keeping his troops in line via his generals and military leaders, falls directly at his dorstep. this is the point i'm trying to make. this Web Sheriff company, when removing videos of Prince, are representing him and his beliefs on copyright infringement issues. therefore their actions can be laid at his feet.

edit: after re-reading your last post, it makes me wonder. if Prince is planning on doing a DVD of the Coachella gig, i have to question if the Creep cover will even be on there. with the way things went with Prince and Radiohead, i seriously doubt they will give him permission to use it on the DVD. they can't stop Prince from performing it live, but they can stop him from releasing it, which i imagine after this spat, they will.

 

[THEV1LL4N]

i just had to post this.

 

[masta247]

It's definately a terrible "song" but I don't know if it's the worst one. Listen to amateur rappers on the internet and such. But it could be one of the worst songs by a "pro" rapper.