IDM Mailing Archive

Many things have been written on the sampling issue... Im a bit out of my depthe, especially in term sof the law as it stands, but what about this as an idea... A sample is like a quote in literature or research based writing. Researcg based writing is about extending and/or progressing the views surrounding the subject at hand, hopefully improving same while at the same time providing an expressive outlet for the writer(s) I view the sample like a quote from another example of the same thing, piece of music, text whatever... In academic writing and in publishing there are legal and professional standards that give order to the process of quoting that generally ensure that the reader is able to be aware when the content is from another place, what that place is, when it originated and who originated it. As far as I understand no money changes hands in this process of acknowledgement and recognition of prior work by a peer. Could this not work in music? Alan This message originates from Netlink.net.au Melbournes Premier Low Cost Internet Service Provider Call in with your Browser to http://www.netlink.net.au/

Wow, is *this* an old subject. Check the archives, Sam. There *are* laws, in fact , many. There are also theoretical postulates as to what the laws should be. Generally, these laws are controlled by the powers that be that are tied to, you guessed it, money...big money. Yes, its nice and utopian to think of what it would be like if we (IDM, et al) ran the show, but as I've said before "it's capitalism, folks". Harsh reality. Props to those who break the laws, but you're on your own if you do so. This ranges from a simple "cease and desist" to a full blown lawsuit. some thoughts below: 1.

quoted 1 line

>>

I think everybody on this list supports the concept of sampling to one extent or another.

quoted 1 line

>>

well, not realy everyone. Anti samplists on the list? 2.

quoted 1 line

>>

What if IDM got to rewrite copyright law?

quoted 1 line

>>

yikes! any lawyers in the house? Socialist lawyers who work for free? 3.

quoted 1 line

>>

To what extent should we respect intellectual property?

quoted 1 line

>>

begs the question: who are "we" and what is "intellectual property"? 4.

quoted 1 line

>>

Is there some arbitrary acceptable sample length?

quoted 1 line

>>

Yes, anyone out there help me with an exact figure? Again, check the archives. 12 seconds and 4 repeated bars? Yes? No? 5.

quoted 1 line

>>

Does the sample need to be messed up/rearranged to be used?

quoted 1 line

>>

as above. 6.

quoted 1 line

>>

What compensation should artists get for the use of their work as samples? When can their work be used with or without their permission? When does something become public domain?

quoted 1 line

>>

again, laws exist. Check 'em out. 7.

quoted 1 line

>>

I don't want what the law is now--what do you think the law should be?

quoted 1 line

>>

No matter what *we* all think, *we* are not the law writers. I think that things should be changed, but in the context of a very sophisticated and legislated monster of a legal system, *my* opinions don't mean shite. I do my part. I vote. I think. I participate in a public forum such as this. But good gravy, I certainly am not going to change laws. Even if everyone on this list boycotted buying *ALL* music from this point on until copywright laws were re-written, it would (and will) take decades, if that, to ever ever change. Peace,

quoted 1 line

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Which raises the question "how far is too far?" I think everybody on this list supports the concept of sampling to one extent or another. What if IDM got to rewrite copyright law? To what extent should we respect intellectual property? Is there some arbitrary acceptable sample length? Does the sample need to be messed up/rearranged to be used? What compensation should artists get for the use of their work as samples? When can their work be used with or without their permission? When does something become public domain? And I don't want what the law is now--what do you think the law should be?

quoted 1 line

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

bpm0@interport.net Peter Becker, Promotions: Retail, DJ Pool Asphodel Records, NYC PO Box 51, Chelsea Station, NY NY 10113 Phone # (212) 965-0265 FAX # (212) 965-0959 http://www.asphodel.com

(...)

quoted 3 lines 1.

> 1. > I think everybody on this > list supports the concept of sampling to one extent or another.

quoted 1 line well, not realy everyone. Anti samplists on the list?

> well, not realy everyone. Anti samplists on the list?

I'm not really an anti-samplist, but I do have some serious thoughts about it. There are categories in this. You can use one sound from someone else's record, or you can use a complete phrase. If you do so, then repeat it a hundred times and add some drums or some lyrics or whatever, you may be a good sampler, but your not an artist, since you haven't really created something of your own. And of course, sampling without permission of the original artist is stealing.

quoted 7 lines 3.

> 3. > >> > To what extent should we respect intellectual > property? > >> > > begs the question: who are "we" and what is "intellectual property"?

Intellectual property is everything that is created by someone, possibly influenced by other creations, but with a certain amount of original elements. Since being creative is the main thing in which we differ from animals, we should treat intellectual property that way.

quoted 8 lines 4.

> > 4. > >> > Is there some arbitrary acceptable sample length? > >> > > Yes, anyone out there help me with an exact figure? Again, check the archives. > 12 seconds and 4 repeated bars? Yes? No?

Probably depending on what's in the sample: One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop ?

quoted 5 lines 5.

> 5. > >> > Does the sample > need to be messed up/rearranged to be used? > >>

I think it should be used differently. eg. You can use that bassloop, but then you should put some different chords on it.

Reply to: RE>>(idm) copywright(s) et wrote:

quoted 2 lines You can use one sound from someone else's record, or

>You can use one sound from someone else's record, or >you can use a complete phrase. If you do so, then repeat it a hundred >times

and add

quoted 1 line some drums or some lyrics or whatever, you may be a good sampler, but >your not

>some drums or some lyrics or whatever, you may be a good sampler, but >your not

an

quoted 1 line artist, since you haven't really created something of your own.

>artist, since you haven't really created something of your own.

with particular reference to "you haven't really created something of your own" i say, "oh dear, oh dear, how naive you are"

quoted 1 line but with a certain amount of original elements.

>but with a certain amount of original elements.

are you quite mad? what is a "certain amount" mean? please quantify the "original elements" in a painting by miro or in ornette coleman's "skies of america" symphony?

quoted 1 line (an allowable sample is) One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop

>(an allowable sample is) One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop

please tell me this is a joke, please, i beg you with all due respect iain

quoted 3 lines (an allowable sample is) One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop

> >(an allowable sample is) One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop > > please tell me this is a joke, please, i beg you

Next time you quote me, please do it right. I wrote: "> Yes, anyone out there help me with an exact figure? Again, check the archives.

quoted 1 line 12 seconds and 4 repeated bars? Yes? No?

> 12 seconds and 4 repeated bars? Yes? No?

Probably depending on what's in the sample: One 12 second sound or a 5 sec bassloop?" (Mind the questionmark) I meant that not the length is important, but what's in it. And btw, Not agreeing with me is one thing, but providing alternatives is a bit harder isn't it ?