3 notes and runnin.... protesting court ruling on sampling

Discuss music production with Ableton Live.
smutek
Posts: 4489
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

3 notes and runnin.... protesting court ruling on sampling

Post by smutek » Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:35 am

This just in my mailbox from downhillbattle
downhillbattle wrote:Hey Everyone,

We are very proud to announce a new project to respond to and protest and last week's major court ruling on sampling. It's called "3 Notes and Runnin'". There are a lot of important music, law, and music industry issues entailed. I'll let the site explain:

http://www.downhillbattle.org/3notes/

Please help us spread the word-- and maybe the musicians out there will want to send something in....

Our press release for this project is below.

It's been a very busy week at Downhill Battle (yesterday's savebetamax.org call-in day was a huge success). You'll probably be hearing from us again soon.

Nicholas Reville
downhillbattle.org
508-963-7832

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

Music Project Protests Appeals Court Decision on Sampling

SEPTEMBER 15, 2004 - Last week the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that any sampled music must have authorization even if a reasonable person could not recognize the origin of the clip. In protest of this ruling, which reversed a lower court decision and severely limits sampling rights, musician Michael Bell-Smith and music activism organization Downhill Battle will launch "3 Notes and Runnin''.

The project can be found at: http://downhillbattle.org/3notes

3 Notes and Runnin' is an online music compilation that will directly disobey--and point out the error in--the Appeals court ruling that even unrecognizable samples are illegal. The compilation will consist of songs made entirely from the 1.5 second Parliament Funkadelic sample that was at issue in the court ruling.

Several respected sample-based musicians have committed to making pieces for the contest, and an open call for submissions was announced today, along with an initial song made by Michael Bell-Smith, a musician and visual artist whose other work can be found at http://burncopy.com/cc

"The songs submitted are all going to sound different; every musician knows you can use any sample in infinitely different ways," said Bell-Smith, "At a certain point, the result is new and entirely different from the source material."

"Some musicians argue for restricting sampling on the basis that the 'personality' of their creation should not be used in ways they don't control," said Downhill Battle's Holmes Wilson, "We think that's capricious, but it has a certain logic. This court ruling, on the other hand, goes way beyond that: even unrecognizable samples that don't carry an ounce of the original musicians' personality are treated like property to be bought and sold."

"The sole purpose of copyright in the U.S. Constitution is to stimulate more creative works," says Downhill Battle's Nicholas Reville, "These judges' bean-counting logic that treats each sound wave as if it were private property has nothing to do with our founding fathers' intentions."

"The current copyright regime has virtually eliminated sampling from mainstream hip-hop," said Nicholas Reville, co-founder of Downhill Battle. "It is simply impossible for producers today to use samples the way they did in the eighties."

Michael Bell-Smith is a Brooklyn, NY based musician and visual artist. He's the frontman for the Brooklyn band "Professor Murder" and runs Burncopy Records.

Downhill Battle is a music activism organization working to support sampling rights, independent musicians, and to end the major label monopoly of the music industry. In February 2004 the group staged the "Grey Tuesday" protests, a online action for copyright reform that drew 100,000 participants.
They are only looking for 30 second submissions.

Any who are interested check the link below.

3notes

rikhyray
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:13 pm
Contact:

Post by rikhyray » Thu Sep 16, 2004 11:29 am

Delicate subject, so no need for not so delicate expressions
Last edited by rikhyray on Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

burgessa23
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2002 12:33 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Post by burgessa23 » Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:29 pm

wow, thats a hell of a response, I think you'd notice getting fucked quicker than 3 seconds, not having trousers on any more would be the first clue...

guess
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:13 pm

Post by guess » Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:33 pm

can you make identical copies of yourself or your mother or your wife? through fucking them, can you turn them into somebody else? is your mother available under the 'fair use' policy?

bad analogy... straight outta your ass

i believe the legislation that this project is questioning will concern a lot of people on this forum. i for one will be submitting my entry a.s.a.p.

check downhillbattle.org and get yr facts straight.


love

rikhyray
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:13 pm
Contact:

Post by rikhyray » Thu Sep 16, 2004 3:46 pm

Stealing is one thing but being shamless enough to organise protest with an objective to legalise stealing is a bit too much. It is very unfortunate this lack of understanding what intelectual property is, what respect is. The worst part of it is that some accomplished artists were ripped off , like the infamous case of Beastie Boys destroying life of one of the greatest american musicians, because they do not have the means to compete in the courts with the ripp off MTV stars. Nobody tries that with rich artist because they know they would loose. Clinton is no Rolling Stones or ex Beatle, so the right decision of the court can be apprecited. At least people be half decent, if you steal, shut up and don`t accuse the shop owner of being capitalist swine.

Razzlesnaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 3:45 am

AUthorization is not such a bad thing

Post by Razzlesnaz » Thu Sep 16, 2004 4:32 pm

Basically you can still use samples if you have authorization. Nobody said youd have to pay although royalty structures would mean you would pay in some instances. I like the idea personally because if you make music for a living it means that you can get proper compenstation for your intelectual property. If you are a lesser known artist and somebody uses your work as a sample guess what?.....YOU HAVE A CASE. If you are going to be using samples follow the rules, respect the law and if you dont like the shit vote, call your congreeman, lobby, but dont steal other musicians intelectual property. Sure its capitalism but it is the prevelant socioeconomic system in the globe.

AcousTronic
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Miami, FL

Post by AcousTronic » Thu Sep 16, 2004 5:02 pm

Someone in Funkadelic is obviously a huge fan of NWA for even hearing that in there and recognizing it. It is so subtle... That does not hinge the musical aspect of the song, and if they wouldn't have had it in there no one would have missed it... Now when it is blatent or the song depends on the sample for audience familiarity like Queen's bassline in Vanilla Ice's 'Ice Ice Baby', that is when royalties should be paid to the rights owner. Screw Funkidelic, they are just looking for a payday.

smutek
Posts: 4489
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Thu Sep 16, 2004 9:24 pm

rikhyray wrote:Stealing is one thing but being shamless enough to organise protest with an objective to legalise stealing is a bit too much.
Shut the fuck up. You have zero credibility. You start your response with "what if someone fucks you or your mother..." and then you go on to talk about someone being shameless? You stupid fucking swine.

The point is that even if the samples are completely unrecognisable they are still considered the property of the record company. I am sure that the intent of the ruling has more to do with the record industries profits than it has to do with protecting intelectual property of the artists. If I take a photograph of a monet, print it out and paint it black, then put a picture of a cow fucking your mother on it is it still a fucking monet?

The point of the project is to show the infinite potential that is available with one small sound source and to protest a ruling that some people feel is unfair.

Your response was offensive and only sugests to me your ignorance and intolerance towards issues with which you disagree. does it really bother you that much that some people have decided to protest against what they see as a huge and bloated industry that stifles, rather than promotes creativity amongst artists? Apparently it does bother you a lot. Enough that you decide to lash out against and insult someone you do not know rather than engage in a discussion. You'd have made a perfect little fucking nazi wouldn't you? Yes, I think you would have.

Fucking cunt. Next time, if you disagree show some restraint and I will try to do the same.

cosmosuave
Posts: 1774
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 3:36 am
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by cosmosuave » Thu Sep 16, 2004 10:24 pm

[ [/quote]

Shut the fuck up. You have zero credibility. You start your response with "what if someone fucks you or your mother..." and then you go on to talk about someone being shameless? You stupid fucking swine.

The point is that even if the samples are completely unrecognisable they are still considered the property of the record company. I am sure that the intent of the ruling has more to do with the record industries profits than it has to do with protecting intelectual property of the artists. If I take a photograph of a monet, print it out and paint it black, then put a picture of a cow fucking your mother on it is it still a fucking monet?

The point of the project is to show the infinite potential that is available with one small sound source and to protest a ruling that some people feel is unfair.

Your response was offensive and only sugests to me your ignorance and intolerance towards issues with which you disagree. does it really bother you that much that some people have decided to protest against what they see as a huge and bloated industry that stifles, rather than promotes creativity amongst artists? Apparently it does bother you a lot. Enough that you decide to lash out against and insult someone you do not know rather than engage in a discussion. You'd have made a perfect little fucking nazi wouldn't you? Yes, I think you would have.

Fucking cunt. Next time, if you disagree show some restraint and I will try to do the same.[/quote]

I have to back you up on that and good analogy regarding the Monet... If it's unrecognizable and nothing close to the original I do not see any harm in using the sample... But if it's a blatant rip off thats another story....
MD SPS-1 DARKENERGY JX-3P (PG200) Mbase01
http://soundcloud.com/cosmosuave
http://www.cosmosuave.com/

montrealbreaks
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Montreal Canada

Post by montrealbreaks » Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:24 am

cosmosuave wrote:
I have to back you up on that and good analogy regarding the Monet... If it's unrecognizable and nothing close to the original I do not see any harm in using the sample... But if it's a blatant rip off thats another story....
Absolutely dude.

What say I publish a song made up of two sine waves at 440 and 660 Hz, going for ten seconds.

Does that mean that nobody else can use a major fifth in the key of a with a sine wave?

What if I publish a song with ten seconds of white noise? Does that become my property? If so, I better get on it, cause I'm gonna be a millionaire!

In my opinion, if you can't recognize a sample, it's not really a sample anymore... I know that with warping, effecting, pitchshifting and mangling sounds the original material is pretty much gone, and the whole debate becomes academic.

I have changed my username; Now posting as:


M. Bréqs

FaX-01
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 3:58 am

Post by FaX-01 » Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:27 am

Guys please give Rikhyray a break .
I know the person you are attacking quite well and he is a well accomplished percussionist and musician who has trained and practice his craft for years.
No his response was unusually passionate I agree and I can see both sides to this arguement but calling someone a "CUNT" is really uncalled for.
Just agree to disagree and move on.
He is very good musician/multi-instrumentalist with a real passion for what he does.
Just agree to disagree or something would you.
It starts sounds a tad offensive (well it does to me anyway).
PS: Hi Rikhyray :) some of us still love ya mate :D .
My aren't the wings of butterflies beautiful and do they not make wonderful perturbations.....

smutek
Posts: 4489
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:04 am

FaX-01 wrote:Guys please give Rikhyray a break .
I know the person you are attacking quite well and he is a well accomplished percussionist and musician who has trained and practice his craft for years.
No his response was unusually passionate I agree and I can see both sides to this arguement but calling someone a "CUNT" is really uncalled for.
Just agree to disagree and move on.
He is very good musician/multi-instrumentalist with a real passion for what he does.
Just agree to disagree or something would you.
It starts sounds a tad offensive (well it does to me anyway).
PS: Hi Rikhyray :) some of us still love ya mate :D .
Whatever fax. No offense to you but I could care less what he is good at or who he is.

I posted this thread to inform people about a project protesting sampling legislation not to spark some debate. Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against a civilized debate if anyone reading this thread feels it is in order but I certainly didn't put this thread up to have some dude say "how about if someone fucks your mother or your wife for three seconds." What the fuck man? Unusually passionate? Sorry, but he could have chosen a better metaphor to illustrate his point. My use of the word "CUNT" was an understatement to say the least.

I know I am justifying my response but damn man, I was genuinely interested in seeing what people thought about this. That guys statement was uncalled for.

toyo
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Katoomba, Australia

Post by toyo » Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:11 am

Smutek I am with you on this, cool link man, thanks.
and all the nasty things you said about the other guy, keep up the good work, i especially like the swine bit.

djshiva
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 4:42 am
Location: indianapolis, USA
Contact:

Post by djshiva » Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:50 am

i just think it's funny that there are people arguing that sampling is stealing on this fucking forum, when any one of us knows just how possible it is to mangle a sample beyond recognition even just with ableton, not to mention the gazillion plugins and whatnot. the fact that the statement says that it is stealing "even if a reasonable person could not recognize the sample" belies the total lack of logic in this argument.

how the fuck are you stealing someone's work (and more importantly, how are they gonna know) if it is so mangled that they would never recognize it?

let's face it...all music is just rearrangement of notes (or ones and zeros). i can take the same three chords that say, the ramones used, and rearrange them and that would be writing a different song. but if i take a 3 second snippet from pfunk and turn it into something that sounds akin to noisy metal screaming...that's stealing...

love it...
http://www.soundcloud.com/djshiva
http://www.facebook.com/djshivamusic
http://sapphicbeats.blogspot.com

Macbook Pro Core 2 Duo / OSX / 2Gb RAM / Ableton Live 8 / Akai LPD8/LPK25

Machinate
Posts: 11648
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Denmark

Post by Machinate » Fri Sep 17, 2004 8:12 am

This is a very interesting debate (apart from all the namecalling)

With this ruling I guess a simple saw waveform is now "intellectual property" if the taken to the extreme. :roll:
[quote "djshiva"]let's face it...all music is just rearrangement of notes (or ones and zeros). i can take the same three chords that say, the ramones used, and rearrange them and that would be writing a different song.[/quote]
True, but there's a difference between notes and samples. A three note passage could be from anywhere, but a sample is still a sample. And it can -usually- be traced back to it's original source. In Dr.Dre productions, anyway ;)

The judges obviously didn't look at *why* the legislation has been set up, it's mainly meant to protect peoples songs, so that they don't get copied by others. And the NWA track hardly invades PFunks share of the marketplace... Besides, whatever happened to statute of limitation? The NWA track is like a gazillion years old! If the lawsuit had been 10(?) years ago, I might have felt differently about it...

Post Reply