WingsOfAnAngel
Banned
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 3
In a decision affecting Hip-Hop producers and artists, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Nashville created what it called a "new rule" in copyright law on Sept. 7.
The "new rule" states that Hip-Hop artists must pay for every sample that they use to create their composition -- regardless of the size of the sample or how it has been altered.
This lawsuit is one of many brought by Bridgeport Music, who is in the business of exploiting musical composition copyrights, and others against approximately 800 defendants for the use of samples without permission in Hip-Hop recordings.
The case centers on the NWA song "100 Miles and Runnin'," which samples a three-note guitar riff from "Get Off Your Ass and Jam" by '70s funk artist George Clinton and Funkadelic.
In the two-second sample, the guitar pitch has been lowered and the sampled piece was "looped" and extended to 16 beats. The sample appears five times in the song.
NWA's song was included in the 1998 movie "I Got the Hook Up," starring Master P and produced by his movie company, No Limit Films.
The lower court in 2002 said that the riff in Clinton's song was entitled to copyright protection, but the sampling "did not rise to the level of legally cognizable appropriation," and granted a summary judgment, which is a judgment given when there is no material issue of fact and the judge finds no need for a trial. The district court found that "no reasonable juror, even one familiar with the works of George Clinton, would recognize the source of the sample without having been told of its source."
No Limit Films has argued that the sample was not protected by copyright law.
Bridgeport Music and Westbound Records, which claim to own the copyrights for the Funkadelic song, appealed the lower court's summary judgment in favor of No Limit Films.
In the decision, the appeals court says, "If you cannot pirate the whole sound recording, can you 'lift' or 'sample' something less than the whole? Our answer to that question is in the negative." The court went on to say, "Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way."
Previous to this decision, the precedent regarded samples in much the same way as other copyrighted works, in that there is no unlawful infringement for copying work unless a substantial portion of the work (in quantity or quality) is copied without permission.
This decision changes that distinction as applied to music.
N.C. State graduate Robert Mooney, co-founder of Four Four Records on Hillsborough Street, likened sampling to writing a paper, something as familiar to a college student as sampling is to a Hip-Hop producer.
"You can go to the library and Xerox a half a page or a page of a book, but if you Xeroxed the whole book, then you're breaking the law," Mooney says. "Within the confines of our copyright laws, there's supposed to be room for you to be able to cite a sentence or a quote in your paper or book. That's allowed, but once you steal their whole composition then you're breaking the copyright laws."
Since the advent of digital music the last decade has seen the record industry clamoring to get legal injunctions against music downloading and subsequently sample artists. Of this Mooney goes on to say, "They don't have the foresight to think 'How can we work with artists to make more money?' They just want to stop it."
"This is more just a reactionary act, the people who own these [copyrights] feel that they're loosing their grip through all of the digital evolution," Mooney concludes. "Just saying, 'We're gonna shut it down' is not going to work."
Many feel that this type of ruling will force more artists underground, producing local level "mixtapes." Mooney echoes this sentiment saying, "People are already bypassing the system, and that's probably for the best."
Jamie Proctor, manager of WKNC radio says of the ruling, "I think it's unfortunate, because there are a lot of creative people who are going to be hurt by it. There are whole styles of music devoted to this idea of taking sounds and samples from other places."
In a Reuters article, Shawn Gee, co-manager of the Roots says, "Sampling is so important. It's the foundation of Rap and Hip-Hop." The earliest rappers like Grandmaster Flash and Sugarhill Gang rhymed over existing music. Gee explains that as Hip-Hop evolved, "sampling became the instrument" to create new sounds.
Some wonder if the ruling is actually a victory for labels who own copyrights. At first glance it appears so -- however, while the ruling protects a copyright owning label, it also can turn them into defendants. Among the 800 sued, all the major labels were among the defendants.
Proctor also points out, "If anything, recognizable samples have been shown to help sell records. They make people hear all these old songs that they haven't heard in 20 years, and there are kids now buying James Brown records because they heard a sample somewhere."
It is apparent to most that a decision like this reaches deep into the Hip-Hop community.
As a Hip-Hop producer, employing samples extensively, and a Ph.D. student in ethnomusicology, Wayne Marshall has a lot to say about the ruling. "It seems that the law is simply out-of-step with common practice at this point, and that's unfortunate -- for it breeds disrespect for the law.
"Historically, the law has had to adapt to cultural practice lest the scales of justice seem tipped. Judges and lawmakers should recognize that technology has changed the way people make and think about music. At any rate, with turntables outselling guitars and music-making software proliferating, I think the cat's out of the bag. Every new ruling is another finger in the dyke."
Luca Riccioli, a beat maker studying sociology at La Sapienza University in Rome, Italy, believes that in order to get past this ruling, sampling must evolve.
"Sampling can't die, it might just evolve. But as long as you force yourself to find new ways of hiding through filtering, chopping, pitching and reversing those sounds, nobody can come to your door asking for money. So at the same time, you really test your skills and improve as a beat maker and a musician," Riccioli says.
"Things have changed, sampling has changed and therefore beat making has changed," Riccioli concludes.
The "100 Miles and Runnin'" case has been remanded to district court for further proceedings and a decision of possible damages. No Limit Films can also seek reconsideration by the U.S. Supreme Court, but has not yet announced their intentions.
The "new rule" states that Hip-Hop artists must pay for every sample that they use to create their composition -- regardless of the size of the sample or how it has been altered.
This lawsuit is one of many brought by Bridgeport Music, who is in the business of exploiting musical composition copyrights, and others against approximately 800 defendants for the use of samples without permission in Hip-Hop recordings.
The case centers on the NWA song "100 Miles and Runnin'," which samples a three-note guitar riff from "Get Off Your Ass and Jam" by '70s funk artist George Clinton and Funkadelic.
In the two-second sample, the guitar pitch has been lowered and the sampled piece was "looped" and extended to 16 beats. The sample appears five times in the song.
NWA's song was included in the 1998 movie "I Got the Hook Up," starring Master P and produced by his movie company, No Limit Films.
The lower court in 2002 said that the riff in Clinton's song was entitled to copyright protection, but the sampling "did not rise to the level of legally cognizable appropriation," and granted a summary judgment, which is a judgment given when there is no material issue of fact and the judge finds no need for a trial. The district court found that "no reasonable juror, even one familiar with the works of George Clinton, would recognize the source of the sample without having been told of its source."
No Limit Films has argued that the sample was not protected by copyright law.
Bridgeport Music and Westbound Records, which claim to own the copyrights for the Funkadelic song, appealed the lower court's summary judgment in favor of No Limit Films.
In the decision, the appeals court says, "If you cannot pirate the whole sound recording, can you 'lift' or 'sample' something less than the whole? Our answer to that question is in the negative." The court went on to say, "Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way."
Previous to this decision, the precedent regarded samples in much the same way as other copyrighted works, in that there is no unlawful infringement for copying work unless a substantial portion of the work (in quantity or quality) is copied without permission.
This decision changes that distinction as applied to music.
N.C. State graduate Robert Mooney, co-founder of Four Four Records on Hillsborough Street, likened sampling to writing a paper, something as familiar to a college student as sampling is to a Hip-Hop producer.
"You can go to the library and Xerox a half a page or a page of a book, but if you Xeroxed the whole book, then you're breaking the law," Mooney says. "Within the confines of our copyright laws, there's supposed to be room for you to be able to cite a sentence or a quote in your paper or book. That's allowed, but once you steal their whole composition then you're breaking the copyright laws."
Since the advent of digital music the last decade has seen the record industry clamoring to get legal injunctions against music downloading and subsequently sample artists. Of this Mooney goes on to say, "They don't have the foresight to think 'How can we work with artists to make more money?' They just want to stop it."
"This is more just a reactionary act, the people who own these [copyrights] feel that they're loosing their grip through all of the digital evolution," Mooney concludes. "Just saying, 'We're gonna shut it down' is not going to work."
Many feel that this type of ruling will force more artists underground, producing local level "mixtapes." Mooney echoes this sentiment saying, "People are already bypassing the system, and that's probably for the best."
Jamie Proctor, manager of WKNC radio says of the ruling, "I think it's unfortunate, because there are a lot of creative people who are going to be hurt by it. There are whole styles of music devoted to this idea of taking sounds and samples from other places."
In a Reuters article, Shawn Gee, co-manager of the Roots says, "Sampling is so important. It's the foundation of Rap and Hip-Hop." The earliest rappers like Grandmaster Flash and Sugarhill Gang rhymed over existing music. Gee explains that as Hip-Hop evolved, "sampling became the instrument" to create new sounds.
Some wonder if the ruling is actually a victory for labels who own copyrights. At first glance it appears so -- however, while the ruling protects a copyright owning label, it also can turn them into defendants. Among the 800 sued, all the major labels were among the defendants.
Proctor also points out, "If anything, recognizable samples have been shown to help sell records. They make people hear all these old songs that they haven't heard in 20 years, and there are kids now buying James Brown records because they heard a sample somewhere."
It is apparent to most that a decision like this reaches deep into the Hip-Hop community.
As a Hip-Hop producer, employing samples extensively, and a Ph.D. student in ethnomusicology, Wayne Marshall has a lot to say about the ruling. "It seems that the law is simply out-of-step with common practice at this point, and that's unfortunate -- for it breeds disrespect for the law.
"Historically, the law has had to adapt to cultural practice lest the scales of justice seem tipped. Judges and lawmakers should recognize that technology has changed the way people make and think about music. At any rate, with turntables outselling guitars and music-making software proliferating, I think the cat's out of the bag. Every new ruling is another finger in the dyke."
Luca Riccioli, a beat maker studying sociology at La Sapienza University in Rome, Italy, believes that in order to get past this ruling, sampling must evolve.
"Sampling can't die, it might just evolve. But as long as you force yourself to find new ways of hiding through filtering, chopping, pitching and reversing those sounds, nobody can come to your door asking for money. So at the same time, you really test your skills and improve as a beat maker and a musician," Riccioli says.
"Things have changed, sampling has changed and therefore beat making has changed," Riccioli concludes.
The "100 Miles and Runnin'" case has been remanded to district court for further proceedings and a decision of possible damages. No Limit Films can also seek reconsideration by the U.S. Supreme Court, but has not yet announced their intentions.
