KVR Audio

rokkon · Post by **rokkon** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 8:47 pm

ericj23 wrote:but it also seems to be saying that you can sample all the individual drum hits you want from your record collection - which is nice

hasn't there been a court descision in america, like a month ago or so, that generally ruled every sampling as copyright breach, no matter how small the sample, or if it has musical content or not?

toine6 · Post by **toine6** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 8:53 pm

Yep, so if you sample from other people's work you had better make it unrecognizable.

Sepheritoh · Post by **Sepheritoh** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:11 pm

I don't think this is about sampling. That is another debate completely. The question is if you can use the rhythm pattern and recreate it with your own sounds. If the author noted it down and registered it, then that person obviously has some rights to it. I am still not so sure if he or she can take you to court for creating a similar rhythm. Let's say the original was played on guitars and somebody else use the same rhythmic pattern, but on piano - different notes, different chords, different sounds. Does it still come down to stealing?

gambaytheunspoken · Post by **gambaytheunspoken** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:25 pm

To answer the original question, the answeris a resounding no. Neither a rhythm nor any particular sequence of chords can be copyrighted. For example, many jazz standards are structured around the exact chord changes of Gershwin's "I got rhythm." Sonny Rollins' "Oleo" comes to mind, and there are many others. And this for the simple fact that no rhythm nor chord changes suggest a particular melody, and vice versa.
Ciao

3*s · Post by **3*s** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:26 pm

I just wrote a house rhythm and mailed it to myself with a copyright sign on it. Time to pay up, bitches!

3*s · Post by **3*s** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:32 pm

Sepheritoh wrote:I don't think this is about sampling. That is another debate completely. The question is if you can use the rhythm pattern and recreate it with your own sounds. If the author noted it down and registered it, then that person obviously has some rights to it. I am still not so sure if he or she can take you to court for creating a similar rhythm. Let's say the original was played on guitars and somebody else use the same rhythmic pattern, but on piano - different notes, different chords, different sounds. Does it still come down to stealing?

No! That's like saying using a blues progession or rhythm changes is "stealing." Rhythmic structure is one of the defining characteristics of different styles of music. Copyrighting that is like copyrighting impressionism.

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:36 pm

rokkon wrote:
ericj23 wrote:but it also seems to be saying that you can sample all the individual drum hits you want from your record collection - which is nice
hasn't there been a court descision in america, like a month ago or so, that generally ruled every sampling as copyright breach, no matter how small the sample, or if it has musical content or not?

better tell milo's lawyers - and the avalanches career is f**ked too

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:39 pm

Does God have copyright on the rhythm of heart beats

toine6 · Post by **toine6** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:41 pm

No, but Peter Pan does.

rokkon · Post by **rokkon** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:50 pm

ericj23 wrote:
rokkon wrote:
ericj23 wrote:but it also seems to be saying that you can sample all the individual drum hits you want from your record collection - which is nice
hasn't there been a court descision in america, like a month ago or so, that generally ruled every sampling as copyright breach, no matter how small the sample, or if it has musical content or not?
better tell milo's lawyers - and the avalanches career is f**ked too

of course in real life, i doubt such ruling will change anything in regard to very small samples, as it already has been said, it just no enforcable law when the material is not recognizable.

djsubject · Post by **djsubject** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:13 pm

ahh use it, fukit if it gets big enuff to get you sued then yr ritch any way

that was a joke! before some prick try's to jump down my vertiule throat

Rock Hardbuns · Post by **Rock Hardbuns** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:38 pm

Read here about what is covred by copyright law:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/2.html

Note though, that most rythms wont qualify as "works" in and of them selves.

Jeff Fried · Post by **Jeff Fried** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:06 pm

Rhythms and chords can't be copyrighted. Notations and recordings of them can be. It doesn't have to have musical content (recordings of spoken voice can be copyrighted). If its recognizable as a copy of a recording you're in violation (assuming you don't own the copyright). Even if you make the copy unrecognizable you're in violation though it may be difficult to prove it.

Regarding copyrighting songs: only the melody and lyrics count. Consider the following example. A musically illiterate, but brilliant songwriter asks you to arrange her song. All she's got is a melody and lyrics. You add chords, a killer groove, and produce the recording session. It becomes a hit. Guess what, its her song and she does not have to credit you for anything. This actually happened to me (except for the "becomes a hit" part), but I was happy to do it because it was a friend and even if you're under 25, beautiful, and talented, the chance of writing a hit song is only slightly greater than winning the lottery.

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:19 am

Jeff Fried wrote:Rhythms and chords can't be copyrighted. Notations and recordings of them can be. It doesn't have to have musical content (recordings of spoken voice can be copyrighted). If its recognizable as a copy of a recording you're in violation (assuming you don't own the copyright). Even if you make the copy unrecognizable you're in violation though it may be difficult to prove it.

Regarding copyrighting songs: only the melody and lyrics count. Consider the following example. A musically illiterate, but brilliant songwriter asks you to arrange her song. All she's got is a melody and lyrics. You add chords, a killer groove, and produce the recording session. It becomes a hit. Guess what, its her song and she does not have to credit you for anything. This actually happened to me (except for the "becomes a hit" part), but I was happy to do it because it was a friend and even if you're under 25, beautiful, and talented, the chance of writing a hit song is only slightly greater than winning the lottery.

I hope your friend never ask Gene Simmons for that kind of help because Gene would have sue your friend for every last penny that was owe to Gene personally.

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:11 am

I think that part of the problem here is that the word "rhythm" means different things.

how long is a "rhythm"?

Well if 'a' rhythm is a beat, then no, it is, for all practical purposes, not copyrightable.

But a piece of music without melody or harmony, like a written drum solo (e.g. Max Roach's "The drum also waltzes") is as copyrightable as any other piece of music.

Between these two extremes I am sure there is a lot of room for lawyers to argue.

Can a rhythm be copyrighted?