How does it work with regarding useing someone elses sample or vocal in a tune? Theres so many tunes out at the minute useing big bits from other peoples tracks like ‘Rob Marmots - T Minus 10 seconds’, ‘Fred Fidget - Ripped to 99 pieces’, ‘Gareth Wyn - Your no good for me’, 'Audio Jacker - California etc. Sureley they cant all of got clearence?? Especially stuff like California thats taken from 2pac’s California? And the T Minus 10 seconds is basically a remix of ‘Origin Unknown - Valley of the shadows’ so how does he get away changing the title and calling it a different track? Surley it should be the same artist and song name but classed as a rob marmot remix?? Its a great version though and im not knocking any of them but i just wondered how to go about it if i ever used a sample?
for stuff like “t - 10 seconds” I doubt Andy c and Ram owned that one origonaly anyway, so you can get away with that.
using loops and vocal samples that are origonal, you have to get clearance. (unless form a sample cd) You can take a chance but there are people paid to chase stuff up like this… for vocals if you did get clearance they may need to be re sang, or the original singer needs paying as well…but Jons right, some people just do it and plead ignorance
Moby recons it’s easier to sample without asking and deal with it after than trying to deal with clearance.
Many big name artists have done it this way and actually ended up getting their track loved and signed by the label who owns the sample in the first place!
In relation to the comment “Moby recons it’s easier to sample without asking and deal with it after than trying to deal with clearance.” it’s worth thinking about the Verve and their ‘accidental sample’ of the Rolling Stones strings at the start of the track. All the royalties went to Alan Klein who owned the copyright. I think the Stones probably loved it but not as much as Mr Klein…
[quote]fasteddie (9/30/2009)[hr]In relation to the comment “Moby recons it’s easier to sample without asking and deal with it after than trying to deal with clearance.” it’s worth thinking about the Verve and their ‘accidental sample’ of the Rolling Stones strings at the start of the track. All the royalties went to Alan Klein who owned the copyright. I think the Stones probably loved it but not as much as Mr Klein…[/quote]
if you want to look at it like that then the Verve would have never had the success they had with out being sued imo. that track for them was their biggest selling track and the publicity that they got from being sued boosted them to the level they got to
You’re right, they wouldn’t have achieved the success without it. They actually had a licence to use a sample but they got done for ‘using too much’. Originally they were it was a 50/50 split but when they saw how well it was doing the copyright owners demanded 100% ownership.
i have read stories before i music mags about people being taken to court over samples they had bought on sample cds. so i guess unless you make the sounds your self from scratch it always gonna be a risk.
[quote]jon_fisher (9/30/2009)[hr]i have read stories before i music mags about people being taken to court over samples they had bought on sample cds. so i guess unless you make the sounds your self from scratch it always gonna be a risk.[/quote]
i can remember listening to the streets on radio1 a few years back and jo whiley asked mike skinner about reports of him being sued for using a uncleared sample in one of his tracks and he said he’d got the sample off a roylty free sample pack he’d bought off ebay or something and basically f*ck em
i agree with jon if you use samples and get sued in the process its a risk you take
if a used a sample and was lucky enough to get the track released i’d worry about getting sued when and if it happened lol
another thing is that a lot of the sample cds vengeance included (i think i read in computer music) use loops that they have ripped from someone’s tracks, so were do you stand legally if although the original artist has given them the rights to use the samples the have not directly given you the rights. this means that unless the samples were created from scratch by the sample bank seller, you are relying on some one else to have cleared the samples for you (royalty free is not always the case)
i always was told that sample clearance only applies to those who have gained permission.
if i had permission to use samples to create a track and i gave them to some one to remix my track would that be breaking the law or is that covered as part of the same permissions.
you know what if i sold enough tracks that a buig comopany got p*issed off and sued me, they can have what they want… at least my name woud have been known… You are right though it used to be the case if you released a cheeky white label and it did well, they would either sign the track, or just nick your idea and release it themselves.
I wanted to add a bit of a vocal to a track, but now i just dont know what to do??! It doesnt seem to stop all these other producers but it would just be my luck to get done for it! I know the record labels themselves dont take any responsability for any samples you use and it is down to the artist to get the clearence to use them (thats what it said in my contract). I just didnt want to spend time adding a vocal, and doing all the stuff i want to do with it only to find out i wasted my time.
