Odd area at times though bro bigtime - For another example some DJ's tracks which are remixes are fine/approved since in those circles remixing one anothers work is encouraged and then released officially if it goes down well in clubs for example
In our circles though covering a track by some band/artist whom either own the rights to it or their label do and releasing it on an album is not-allowed unless you pay for the privaledge/rights to do so/get it ok'd. Such as say a Beatles cover - this matters alot more on record and live it is usally fine to cover it or covers bands would be fresh out of work
That hip-hop genre our good friend Ervin dislikes with a passion - alot of the records released in that genre in the late 80's early to mid 90's were ripping breaks and hooks left, right and center from other records (apache by the shadows being the most lifted beat/break IIRC). Then they put a big crackdown on it and the samples swipped had to be ok'd and sort by label from other label which in some cases was about 70% of the hip-hop record (must of been a frickin nightmare to be the people in charge of clearing the rights to the used samples/breaks and paying royalities/license fees to all it concerns!!!). It tends to not be that way anymore as its such a headache to clear all the material and they use all/mostly original source sounds but i have noticed the more original it has become (without ripping old drum breaks/hooks/themes from classic records...etc.) the more it sounds unoriginal and samey ironically...maybe in that genre's case the 'Art of sampling' to create something semi-familiar but at the same time 'New/Fresh' was what made it/does apply
Strange the way it all works really and i am just touching upon the tip of an iceberg here
Peace
Dean
