What is KVR Audio? | Submit News | Advertise | Developer Account

Options (Affects News & Product results only):

OS:
Format:
Include:
Quick Search KVR

"Quick Search" KVR Audio's Product Database, News Items, Developer Listings, Forum Topics and videos here. For advanced Product Database searching please use the full product search. For the forum you can use the phpBB forum search.

To utilize the power of Google you can use the integrated Google Site Search.

Products 0

Developers 0

News 0

Forum 0

Videos 0

Search  

Copyright?

Anything about MUSIC but doesn't fit into the forums above.

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

ntom
KVRAF
 
2134 posts since 18 Oct, 2010, from Texas

Postby ntom; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:06 am Re: Copyright?

sonicpowa wrote:
ntom wrote:--under copyright there are some rules that say that as long as it's less than 30 seconds--
There are NO such rules. It´s not about the lenght of the sample.

That was in reference to use of a piece of media in general, not in sampling specifically. Obviously if that breeches the other listed item, which you clearly forgot to pay attention to, then it wouldn't be acceptable.
Trust me, for my degree in advertising I had to take a course on copyright.
experimental.crow
KVRAF
 
4798 posts since 9 Mar, 2003

Postby experimental.crow; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:23 am Re: Copyright?

ntom wrote:
sonicpowa wrote:
ntom wrote:--under copyright there are some rules that say that as long as it's less than 30 seconds--
There are NO such rules. It´s not about the lenght of the sample.

That was in reference to use of a piece of media in general, not in sampling specifically. Obviously if that breeches the other listed item, which you clearly forgot to pay attention to, then it wouldn't be acceptable.
Trust me, for my degree in advertising I had to take a course on copyright.


but did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express ™ ?...
Image
User avatar
whyterabbyt
Beware the Quoth
 
21388 posts since 3 Sep, 2001, from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair

Postby whyterabbyt; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:27 am Re: Copyright?

ntom wrote:Trust me, for my degree in advertising I had to take a course on copyright.


Im assuming you didnt pass it, then, after this comment.

Well technically Copyright exists to remove the damages done by someone stealing another persons intellectual properties. If you release tracks for free (that only minutely samples bits of the artists music), it's not technically damaging their revenues from the use of their intellectual property, and would probably not mean anything to the owner of the source material.
To laymen, software development is something akin to wizardry. Neither time, nor effort are involved. If software is missing features they want, or has bugs, it is solely because someone has been too lazy to wave their magic wand.
ntom
KVRAF
 
2134 posts since 18 Oct, 2010, from Texas

Postby ntom; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:29 am Re: Copyright?

I'm not right at everything :shrug:
I thought that remark would get a few good response :lol:
deastman
KVRAF
 
4015 posts since 6 Aug, 2003, from San Francisco Bay Area

Postby deastman; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:55 am Re: Copyright?

Copyright is not just about recovering damages. It also protects the creator of a work from having someone else claim the work (or part of it) as their own. You can't just play someone else's music as part of your song without their permission. Period.

Now, whether you changed it to become unrecognizable, or whether you think you can get away with the theft of that sample, or whether some other artist you've heard of May have gotten away with stealing samples... Those are all possibilities, but have nothing whatsoever to do with the actual law. If you think you can use uncleared samples and release your songs to a wide audience without getting sued, then more power to you. Just be aware that you're doing so at your own risk.

Another misconception is the belief that attribution makes it okay to use someone else's work without permission. It doesn't. If you take a photograph from a professional photographer and use it as the banner image on your website, while providing credit and a link back to their site, don't be surprised if you receive a letter from their attorney. Attribution doesn't pay the bills. Likewise, that song you sampled May have required an artist to pay for a recording studio, session musicians, a producer, mastering, and distribution. Those costs have to be recovered somehow, and just because you put their name in the liner notes of your song, that won't pay their bills.
Incomplete list of my gear: 1/4" audio patchcord
User avatar
Sendy
KVRAF
 
4418 posts since 20 Jul, 2010

Postby Sendy; Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:06 am Re: Copyright?

I still miss going through thrift stores in the 90's, finding weird out-of-print records to sample, nutjobs talking, easy listening strings, novelty records, stereo test tracks. These days it's just too much hastle. While folks like Luke Vibert and many others seem to be able to do what they want, some hobbyist with 50 listeners touches a sample and all hell breaks loose :hihi:. It's just simpler to create the music yourself, and make it sound like it was sampled from a record, and use sample libraries where you can.

Typical case of the bean-counters arriving and spoiling the fun for everyone.
http://sendy.bandcamp.com/releases < My new album at Bandcamp!
deastman
KVRAF
 
4015 posts since 6 Aug, 2003, from San Francisco Bay Area

Postby deastman; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:29 pm Re: Copyright?

I agree, more or less. I think that if you take a whole bar of music and loop it as the basis of your track, royalties should be paid. But back when none of this case law was settled, my industrial band was making music by weaving together little snippets of sound on an Emax and an EPS, lifted from TV, radio, vinyl, cd's, tape, and our own original banging about, played polyphonically as if they were normal instruments. It was a very creative time.
Incomplete list of my gear: 1/4" audio patchcord
User avatar
arkmabat
KVRAF
 
2427 posts since 5 Nov, 2009

Postby arkmabat; Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:32 pm Re: Copyright?

ntom wrote:
sonicpowa wrote:
ntom wrote:--under copyright there are some rules that say that as long as it's less than 30 seconds--
There are NO such rules. It´s not about the lenght of the sample.

That was in reference to use of a piece of media in general, not in sampling specifically. Obviously if that breeches the other listed item, which you clearly forgot to pay attention to, then it wouldn't be acceptable.
Trust me, for my degree in advertising I had to take a course on copyright.


In GERMANY it IS about the length of the sample. In the USA it is not so.
SampleScience
KVRAF
 
2449 posts since 31 Oct, 2004, from Mtl, Canada

Postby SampleScience; Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:43 pm Re: Copyright?

bailees7irish wrote:
dune_rave wrote:The solution is simple: don't use samples. Use synths (Synths has samples too but that's OK).
+Use existing midi files and change their notes

Really - what about "midi sampling"?


Sure I can do that...in fact, I've been considering recreating all the old worn out tape and vinyl samples I want to use in future tracks and trying to recreate them all with synths and VSTs...but imagine how much time that would take!! I mean, I only have so much time in a day. :hihi:


It takes a lot of time, believe me! :wink: :hihi:
sprnva
KVRist
 
165 posts since 16 Jan, 2013

Postby sprnva; Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:49 am Re: Copyright?

I'd still love to know how Girl Talk can fly in the face of everything mentioned in this thread and hasn't been sued into oblivion. Here's a couple of examples for anyone unfamiliar. This album is from 2008.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trmacqG9uKA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3rbXfFW66M
Obvious samples, obviously no clearance, yet being sold on CD/download. We're not talking amateur youtube mashup here. You can buy this (and his other CDs) on Amazon and elsewhere right now if you feel so inclined.

Is it enough to just say "I don't claim ownership of this music"?

It can't be because he's making new work from samples of other peoples music because we all know the stories of artists getting sued for one little uncleared sample. Or are those days over now? I haven't been keeping track lately.

I'd really like to get to the bottom of this.
Last edited by sprnva on Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:59 am, edited 3 times in total.
fedexnman
KVRian
 
1330 posts since 3 Jan, 2005

Postby fedexnman; Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:54 am Re: Copyright?

Didn't MTV news use a Bass guitar sample from Megadeths Peace sells song as there opening for MTV news ? Im kind of like make sure you get permission if you go public with it imho .
jancivil
KVRAF
 
9490 posts since 20 Oct, 2007

Postby jancivil; Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:21 pm Re: Copyright?

bailees7irish wrote:
ZenPunkHippy wrote:It's pretty simple IMO ...

Do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home.

Performing live in public or releasing music out in the real world, pay your respects by observing copyright laws and getting clearance for the samples.

Peace,
Andy.


It's simple if a.) you're a millionaire or if b.) you just don't use any uncleared samples.
Unfortunately, neither of those are viable options for me, so...I guess I'll have to claim fair use if/when the time comes. :hihi:
I'm not a millionaire. I have never used 'uncleared' samples. I have used things like thunderclaps off of Freesound with attribution. It never in my life occurred to me to slap other people's recorded music together instead of making my own music. I don't know what being a millionaire has to do with it unless you have had this modeled by rich assholes that buy their way out of litigation.

What's missing in your original post is whether or not you present this music to the public in some way as your own. IE, without specific attribution where there is a CC type of license you agree to, or without permission where the person that actually made the music, or even just made some sounds has specified their permission is required. Now that you're still talking after seeing 'do as you like in private', it appears you don't restrict yourself to that?

You may want to look up the language where Fair Use is deemed appropriate and even legal. This, copyright - By Permission Only - is too hard for you to respect? How does that work, do you feel entitled to someone else's property out in the world? Even if it's never going to be shared, some people will want to be compensated for THE USE OF: Their work. Their investment, their time. But no, it's yours now somehow.

Should you feature something at the Youtube and get caught, 'Fair Use' is no slam dunk. You lose disputes, you lose your account.
Not using uncleared samples is NOT VIABLE for you? Jesus. Grow up some, see if you don't like standing on your own two feet for a minute.
trimph1
KVRAF
 
13788 posts since 23 Jun, 2010, from north of London ON

Postby trimph1; Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:54 pm Re: Copyright?

easier route. Just DIY without applying uncleared stuff. sheesh
Barry
The man who survived mustard gas and pepper spray is now a seasoned veteran
http://www.ambientonline.org/
User avatar
aciddose
KVRAF
 
9056 posts since 7 Dec, 2004, from Vancouver, Canada

Postby aciddose; Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:11 pm Re: Copyright?

Actually it is more complex these days.

For example say you produce a track that uses a sound resembling a sound in another track. Easy to do either unintentionally or not. Case in point "whub whub whub".

Now it comes down to a set of conditions determining whether you're liable or not:

  1. Have you been sued by someone? No? f**k copyright in that case, it is meaningless nonsense that people get their panties in a knot about on internet forums.
  2. Would a "reasonable" person agree that the sound bears a distinct resemblance to the sound used by those you're being sued by?
  3. Is it reasonable to expect that you could have remained unexposed to this sound, making your "infringement" entirely coincidental?

These all have silly names and case-law to go with them but I'll just skip that, feel free to look it up if interested.

Lets create an example then,

  1. You produce the latest hit whubstep track.
  2. The author of the previous hit whubstep track, now demoted to position #2 decides to sue claiming you've used the sound from their track in yours.
  3. Most people would agree "that is exactly the same f**king sound I've heard in every hit whubstep track ever made."
  4. Evidence is presented from a post on a music forum where you commented on a post by another user containing a link to a youtube clip of the aforementioned whubstep track, wherein you make the statement "I really like that whubwhubwhub sound they used. I'll use it in my track too!"

This is real life. This is copyright today.

It isn't quite as simple as "without applying uncleared stuff".

The case I described as insane as it may seem could actually go down exactly like that today in the United States. Case-law exists to ensure it would go exactly like that. All you need to have happen is for someone to bother to sue.
User avatar
Tricky-Loops
KVRAF
 
8266 posts since 12 Mar, 2012, from South Bavaria - near the alps... :-)

Postby Tricky-Loops; Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:25 pm Re: Copyright?

sprnva wrote:I'd still love to know how Girl Talk can fly in the face of everything mentioned in this thread and hasn't been sued into oblivion. Obvious samples, obviously no clearance, yet being sold on CD/download. We're not talking amateur youtube mashup here. You can buy this (and his other CDs) on Amazon and elsewhere right now if you feel so inclined.

Is it enough to just say "I don't claim ownership of this music"?

It can't be because he's making new work from samples of other peoples music because we all know the stories of artists getting sued for one little uncleared sample. Or are those days over now? I haven't been keeping track lately.

I'd really like to get to the bottom of this.
Luck? There are many tracks with uncleared samples out there, especially in the hip hop genre. And Madeon even sampled 30 commercial tracks without clearance for his song "Pop Culture", and he got...SIGNED by a record company! :o

Some time ago I heard a rap song where the producer sampled the chorus line of "They don't care about us" by Michael Jackson - and it wasn't Pitbull or Timbaland, it was a poor rapper from Austria. And I thought, WTF, how can you do that? To get a legal license would cost a sum of at least 5 figures of dollars! Never in my life I would use samples of well known artists like Michael Jackson...

Anyway, while it's right to recommend NOT to use uncleared samples, the reality is on a different page...
Last edited by Tricky-Loops on Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:32 pm, edited 3 times in total.
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Everything Else (Music related)