Let's Talk About copyright issues

[re.mark]

but I used an acapella that was stripped from an mp3, so it has some transients...

Doesnt all audio have some form of transient(s)?

[DangerousDave]

Fyi,

Having had a brief look at the Interscope digital page I reckon it's worth shopping around a bit as there are loads of better digital distribution deals that that Interscope one.

Good call, thanks for the heads up... I wasn't quite set on it myself but I will look around.

Cheers

[DangerousDave]

but I used an acapella that was stripped from an mp3, so it has some transients...

Doesnt all audio have some form of transient(s)?

Ha...oh you hush

[re.mark]

but I used an acapella that was stripped from an mp3, so it has some transients...

Doesnt all audio have some form of transient(s)?

Ha...oh you hush

ahahah

[3phase]

Do you need the clearance? Is a label releasing the record? Do you realistically expect to sell 10-20,000+?

If the answer to any of these is no, you may consider not clearing it.

do you pay for the software you use?

if your bootleg is supposed to sell below under 500 you might get away without clearance..

beside that you have to sign to your label that you hold the rights.. so if you use samples you cant sign that without comiting a fraud...

when you are comiting this fraud every other in the diribution line is clear.. therfore distributions dont care at all where the material they distribute comes from..

most people dont care much when using illegal copied music and pirated software..


do you expect people to pay money for yor tracks or is it allwright with you that they download and use it for free?

[contakt321]

Do you need the clearance? Is a label releasing the record? Do you realistically expect to sell 10-20,000+?

If the answer to any of these is no, you may consider not clearing it.

do you pay for the software you use?

if your bootleg is supposed to sell below under 500 you might get away without clearance..

beside that you have to sign to your label that you hold the rights.. so if you use samples you cant sign that without comiting a fraud...

when you are comiting this fraud every other in the diribution line is clear.. therfore distributions dont care at all where the material they distribute comes from..

most people dont care much when using illegal copied music and pirated software..


do you expect people to pay money for yor tracks or is it allwright with you that they download and use it for free?

After working in the music industry for 10+ years, I am giving very normal, practical advice. Everyone has their own ethics, standards, etc regarding sampling, it certainly is a quagmire.

I would venture to say that 99% of sample based records that come out in independent labels have uncleared samples. Even records that do have sample clearances, at most generally people only clear the main sample, not the drums, odd hits, etc. It's very commonplace to sign a contract that says there are no samples, even if there is. I didn't say it's right or wrong, just commonplace.

[3phase]

It's very commonplace to sign a contract that says there are no samples, even if there is. I didn't say it's right or wrong, just commonplace.

as long nobody seews its no crime...

[DangerousDave]

do you pay for the software you use?

I sure do

I was actually pretty set on letting people download it for free, since I would probably not make much anyways. (if any!)

I was mainly looking for a way to some exposure, and I thought this may be one route to go down. The whole self promote, self sell your own album thing just seems so...the opposite of promising.

[Pitch Black]

2 things:

Did you know the entire Art of Noise (Anne Dudley, JJ Jeczalik, Trevor Horn etc) share writers credits on "Firestarter" by The Prodigy.
The reason: "Hey!"


"Where there's a Hit, there's a Writ"

[memes_33]

just so things are clear, (at least here in america) if you use a sample, you are supposed to clear it with 1) the owner of the publishing rights (most of the time the guy/guys who write it, through BMI, ASCAP, etc) & 2) the owner of the actual recording.

that being said, no one is paying attention. i started worrying about this a few years ago as most of my tracks (back then) were 95% sampled material. i found every publisher & recording contact, wrote them all, and never heard back from one of them. if you are sampling something that a majority of people will recognize, and plan for it to make any impact on the radios, you might want to worry about it. otherwise, pillage away!

plunderphonics!

[DangerousDave]

just so things are clear, (at least here in america) if you use a sample, you are supposed to clear it with 1) the owner of the publishing rights (most of the time the guy/guys who write it, through BMI, ASCAP, etc) & 2) the owner of the actual recording.

that being said, no one is paying attention. i started worrying about this a few years ago as most of my tracks (back then) were 95% sampled material. i found every publisher & recording contact, wrote them all, and never heard back from one of them. if you are sampling something that a majority of people will recognize, and plan for it to make any impact on the radios, you might want to worry about it. otherwise, pillage away!

plunderphonics!

Good call, thanks for the advice. Doubt it will make the airwaves so I might as well live dangerously

[xuoham]

Fyi,
... there are loads of better digital distribution deals that that Interscope one.

Like who for example ?
Thanx

[!STiTCH!]

Based on these replies I must ask - have any of you even READ anything about music law or used and paid for sample clearance?

First - I would say do the RIGHT thing and pay the licensing fees to save yourself not needed trouble. 20 years from now you may be a has been living off the meager royalties your one hit garners, do YOU want someone else making money off of your art?

Second - Its cheaper than dirt to license songs for the most part. I recorded an EP for a guy in my local area, and upon my direction we did a cover of Corey Harts "Sunglasses At Night". It cost us less than $50 for the licensing. (mechanical royalties are about .10 per copy in the US - meaning you pay .10 per copy made or downloaded)

Third - If you're looking at getting a distributor for your song, chances are SOMEONE may hear your uncleared sample, if that happens see points one and two.

Also, as far as sending it in for consideration, that can fall under the fair use act, you only need to pay the licensing/royalty fees if you are releasing/performing the tune for the purpose of making $$.

**Authors Note**I am in no way trying to insult, degrade or say anyone else is wrong, but I do question the advice being given here. Also, I live and operate in the US so I understand that my knowledge and experience is limited to the Imperialistic United States Copyright Laws.

[3phase]

do you pay for the software you use?

I sure do

I was actually pretty set on letting people download it for free, since I would probably not make much anyways. (if any!)

I was mainly looking for a way to some exposure, and I thought this may be one route to go down. The whole self promote, self sell your own album thing just seems so...the opposite of promising.

..

I know the dilema .. i have done some remixes of tracks i like just for fun and actually like to have them out just for the sake that others can hear them at one point.. i defently never would sell such a thing as an own composition...

there are different options.. depends of the laws of your country.. i would say to get in contact with the authors and not the publishing company can be beneficial for booth sides.. if you do quality material..

the last resort is to get it a video and post it freely on youtube..with mentioning the original authors..

in case its close enough related to the track of cause

In case its something ttotaly different with sampkes nobody even can realize you dont need to bother much
But if you have
taken a significant groove/hook, and cant call it a remix version or cover you only have the political uncorrect way of just releasing and see what happens.. in reality not much is happening as long you dont hit the charts...

or you clear the samples...but risk that someone says no or asks for to high payment

and again ..as last resort..bundle it with a nice video and use youtube.. you wont make money with it... so no crime.. the only can remove it.. and you still can name original author and yourself so its a promotion for booth of you...

if you want to earn something with it you either commit fraud or pay..so easy it is.. the original authors like to earn something with theire work aswell

[DangerousDave]

Based on these replies I must ask - have any of you even READ anything about music law or used and paid for sample clearance?

First - I would say do the RIGHT thing and pay the licensing fees to save yourself not needed trouble. 20 years from now you may be a has been living off the meager royalties your one hit garners, do YOU want someone else making money off of your art?

Second - Its cheaper than dirt to license songs for the most part. I recorded an EP for a guy in my local area, and upon my direction we did a cover of Corey Harts "Sunglasses At Night". It cost us less than $50 for the licensing. (mechanical royalties are about .10 per copy in the US - meaning you pay .10 per copy made or downloaded)

Third - If you're looking at getting a distributor for your song, chances are SOMEONE may hear your uncleared sample, if that happens see points one and two.

Also, as far as sending it in for consideration, that can fall under the fair use act, you only need to pay the licensing/royalty fees if you are releasing/performing the tune for the purpose of making $$.

**Authors Note**I am in no way trying to insult, degrade or say anyone else is wrong, but I do question the advice being given here. Also, I live and operate in the US so I understand that my knowledge and experience is limited to the Imperialistic United States Copyright Laws.

Stitch, I appreciate the info, this was actually my main concern, and how I felt before this discussion, I looked into mechanical licenses and as you say, they are cheap. 9.1 cents per d/l if I am not mistaken, which isn't bad at all. I however, did not know about the fair use act policy and this is precisely the information I needed, and I sincerely appreciate the input.

This definitely clears up the issue for me, as I now understand how this all works, if for anything else, just future reference. I in no way intended to sell 100k copies, so I hope my initial phrasing didn't come off as arrogant, I just wanted a better understanding of the system and how one would go about something like this in my situation.

Anywho, I appreciate everyone's input. We can all hug now.