Are you breaking copyright if you chop up a sample?

[whyterabbyt]

Which is kind of silly really, given the (fairly lax IIRC) rules on how much you have to modify a melody before you no longer have to pay the original writer. I really think it would do the music industry a lot of good (ie result in a lot more exciting new music and thus a lot more people buying lots of records) if they pulled their heads out of their arses on sampling.

The difference, as far as copyright deals with it, seems to be that a sample is a recording of a performance (of some description), and that you are deriving directly from the recording of that specific performance.
However plenty of people have been 'done' for breach of copyright of melodies. Just ask George Harrison.

[eduardo_b]

I really think it would do the music industry a lot of good (ie result in a lot more exciting new music and thus a lot more people buying lots of records) if they pulled their heads out of their arses on sampling.

But it's not about the music, is it? The "music" industry would be more accurately called the "money first" industry. What used to be a lot of record companies that really were about music is now five gigantic corporations that see samples as a license to print money for virtually no effort on their part. There's no reasonable way to legally use samples under the current circumstances.

[deleted]

DELETED

[deleted]

DELETED

[DWb]

I really think it would do the music industry a lot of good (ie result in a lot more exciting new music and thus a lot more people buying lots of records) if they pulled their heads out of their arses on sampling.

But it's not about the music, is it? The "music" industry would be more accurately called the "money first" industry.

But even the music industry reacts to change. When hip hop got big, they started hawking radio friendly hip hop derivatives and making lots of money off it. When techno got big, they started hawking radio friendly techno derivatives and making lots of money off it. And so on.

I might be being idealistic, but I think that even music industry marketing isn't able to sell a completely stagnant product for ever - kids will find something else to get excited about and spend their money on. If they strangle the lifeblood out of innovative music then they'll have nothing to exploit and will die. Whereas if they loosen the laws to let people do what they want creatively, and then exploit the more marketable stuff that comes out of it, they'll win big: music will be the most exciting branch of popular culture and they'll be exploiting the most profitable bits of music.

[deleted]

DELETED

[pico]

So many tunes use breaks from James Brown stuff for example.

But if you chop up the rhythm into something not resembling the original, is it ok to use it in a commercial release? Seems like that should be derivitive work and not actionable?

It seems there's a grey area there. Is it still different from the original if you only rearrange one kick drum hit for example?

I guess I'm wondering how much a sample needs to be modified to make it....well...legal to use.

Well..... a while ago i chopped a sample from a artist, rearranged it, thought they could not hear it.
Released it, and after a while we got a fax , or we had to pay a lot or a had to remove the record from the shops.
We chose the last option.


So are you breaking copyright if you chop up a sample?


Yes

[GIRO]

This TOPIC smells like pollution to me and to others I'm sure!
OLD and rotting the subject is!

AND the funny part of it is that the person that starts the thread, never replies!

I think he or she is having fun reading the replies!

SHAME ON YOU! THE ARE SO LITTLE MUSICIANS NOW DAYS! (a bunch of copy cats.)
DO YOUR OWN MUSIC YOU SILLY MAN!

Let this thread die!

HAPPY THANXGIVING!