Copyright and Sampling

MrZian · Post by **MrZian** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 11:31 pm

Is there any general rules on what you can and can not use in terms of sampling from records. Most of my sampling is from field recordings, but now im getting into sampling records, I perform as well so i dont want to run into any trouble down the track.

balazs · Post by **balazs** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:21 am

I never went thru the trouble of getting my sample based music legal, but i would imagine it would take a lot of bullshit for an underground musician to pull that off. but idk

That just more inspiration to flip it past recognition though

Euclid Ov Oåklånd · Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:41 am

I know all classical music is public domain, since an original artist is no longer around to pay.

cartesia · Post by **cartesia** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:50 am

I wouldnt worry unless:

a) you're rich/making a fair bit of money
b) really popular
c) closer to ripping things off than sampling for creative purpose

606man · Post by **606man** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:56 am

It can actually be a GOOD thing to make your name from a sample-based track. You'll have to deal with the fact that the you won't see a cent from that production, but you'll have made a name for yourself, which you can then use to promote your own original stuff.

"Black Box - Ride on Time"; all the money went to the original artist, but Black Box got famous, toured the world and had a couple of hits that they DID get the money from.

Don't ever worry about sampling unless you are being dishonest about it

Dj Frantic · Post by **Dj Frantic** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:51 pm

its not illegal if u dont get caught/dont make money :-D

ghost bazz · Post by **ghost bazz** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:07 pm

606man wrote:...

"Black Box - Ride on Time"; all the money went to the original artist, but Black Box got famous, toured the world and had a couple of hits that they DID get the money from.

Plus we all know what "The Grey Album" did for Danger Mouse... through the freakin roof! and all he got was a cease and desist letter. Since it was officially a promo cd he didn't have any on-the-book profits for anyone to stake claim to.

606man · Post by **606man** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:18 pm

perzactly

drewzle · Post by **drewzle** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:35 am

juxt wrote:That just more inspiration to flip it past recognition though

amen - that's what this is all about

Twitch · Post by **Twitch** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:40 am

I know all classical music is public domain, since an original artist is no longer around to pay.

Under the latest iteration of the law (1978), works by individual authors were protected until 50 years after the year of the author's death. The Bono extension increases this to 70 years. (Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act (1998)

Works published Jan. 1, 1978, and after are protected for 70 years after the death of the author. For joint works, it is 70 years after the death of the last author to die.

Works "published" by corporations and created by employees as part of their jobs (called work-for-hire) are protected for 95 years from publication or for 120 years from creation.

Very important, this means if you have a singer or collab with someone and you exchange money for services, you have to wait for 120 years from the creation.. Read more about work for hires, I think they get to techincal on that, even if you ask for feedback on your music an you change it to someone elses feedback then you must copyright it with their name as a co-author.

Works created before Jan. 1, 1978, but not published by that date are protected for the life of the author plus 70 years or until Dec. 31, 2002, whichever is later. If the work is published on or before Dec. 31, 2002, protection will expire on Dec. 31, 2047, regardless of when the author died.

Works created between Jan. 1, 1923, and Dec. 31, 1977, have protection based on renewal periods/dates rather than the author's death date. Works from this era will require careful research in the Copyright Office's records to find out if a renewal was made during the appropriate window. If this was not done or not done properly, protection expired after the first term, and the work has fallen into the public domain. If, however, renewals were done correctly, the maximum protection period is 95 years.

Similarly, works created January 1, 1964, through December 31, 1977, are protected for 95 years from the date of creation.

Works created in 1922 or before are now public domain. No new material will enter the public domain for another 20 years.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Foreign copyright regulations are very complex and the duration of copyright can vary significantly. Some authorities advise that it is not safe to assume that a foreign work copyrighted in the last 200 years is in the public domain. (See also international copyright.)

So that means Beethoven and Mozart's shit is off limits

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Use Guidelines

Fair use allows others to copy and use the original work of others for limited uses:

Criticism or parody of original works

News reporting

Scholarship

Research

Teaching and educational uses

Fair use is based upon the following factors:

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

The nature of the copyrighted work (the more factual the work, the more likely it will be fair use)

The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the work

axiom gates · Post by **axiom gates** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:57 am

thanks for da breakdown/info homie

Huph · Post by **Huph** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:53 pm

Industry Secret: The big labels aren't really gunning for samplers anymore. All their legal money is being spent at going after digital piracy. Over the last year, I've had no trouble clearing samples, even from big artists like Modest Mouse. All for nothing. They're kind of catching on to the idea that sampling is a form of viral marketing. See, you put that word "marketing" in something and all of a sudden guys in suits are all for it.

Not to say that if you blow up, they won't come after you (As a matter of fact, the samples I have cleared have all been done so on the basis that if I do make significant money in the future, we have to renegotiate our agreement). They just aren't wasting time going after samplers and unknown artists. They're losing money astonishingly fast. They really don't have the resources anymore. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that by the time someone just starting out today makes it big, the record companies will be a thing of the past.

MrZian · Post by **MrZian** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:06 am

I think that record companies are still an important part of the industry. As for big labels I'm not sure that they will stick around, but record companies are basically a loan facility, because what unknown act could afford to record an album in a good studio.

The problem is that the general listeners would prefer a professional recording because they are not use to lo fi music. So to get the money to make a professional album, you need something like a record company. and obviously there contacts are a huge help.

adru · Post by **adru** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:26 pm

actually "good studios"havent been a neccesity for professional sounding recordings for years-espescially when doing hip hop or anything electronic/beat based.nowadays the only time a studio is neccesarry is if you're recording multiple live instruments,i.e. rock bands-even then itsnot a neccesity.. the technology that exists now compared to just 10,15 years ago makes it possible for anyone to make a "professional" recording in their home,if they have the right stuff.the only thing a record company is useful for is marketing and distribution-and because theres now so many other avenues for both those things,record companies are being pushed further and further out of the equation.and thats a good thing.

Twitch · Post by **Twitch** » Sat Jul 05, 2008 12:19 am

the only thing a record company is useful for is marketing and distribution-and because theres now so many other avenues for both those things,record companies are being pushed further and further out of the equation.and thats a good thing.

Very, Very true, however I still believe record companies will always be around. They have that multi-million dollars to back anything. If you notice high price studios of the past are coming down in price quick, very quick $35-60 and hour, cuz they have to compete. I wonder what are record companies going to do to still stay in business, I'm surprise they don't just buy the web (I know it's not for sale, but ALMOST everything has a price), or a good percent of something, look at Apple.. People are so afraid of Record companies taking over, we forget about itunes, and other online venues, how much of the pie are they getting? Yeah they started out as indie musicians like us, but so did those Record companies.. When will something be revealed from our online distrubution buddies? Say a matter of time?