Kraftwerk lose sampling case

[GuitarGeek]

Rush used Raymond Scott's "Powerhouse" in "La Villa Strangiato".

Which they eventually paid for. The band knew the piece from the Looney Tunes cartoons, where Carl Stalling used it regularly. Since there was never any actual credit in the cartoons for the music (Stalling was typically billed with "musical direction"), they had no way to find out whose name should be in the byline.

Eventually, it came to be known it was a Raymond Scott piece. Apparently, the Scott estate planned to sue the band, but were unable to because the statute of limitations ran out. So the band voluntarily gave a big lump sum of money to the Scott estate, which seems to have made everyone happy.

I imagine if the Scott estate had found out about La Villa Strangiato back in 1978, things might have been a little different.

[A. Scherze]

Which they eventually paid for. The band knew the piece from the Looney Tunes cartoons, where Carl Stalling used it regularly. Since there was never any actual credit in the cartoons for the music (Stalling was typically billed with "musical direction"), they had no way to find out whose name should be in the byline.

Eventually, it came to be known it was a Raymond Scott piece. Apparently, the Scott estate planned to sue the band, but were unable to because the statute of limitations ran out. So the band voluntarily gave a big lump sum of money to the Scott estate, which seems to have made everyone happy.

I imagine if the Scott estate had found out about La Villa Strangiato back in 1978, things might have been a little different.

They could credited Stalling.
They could have contacted Warner Brothers.
They could have consulted with a cartoon expert.
They could have not used it.

[chalkpie]

They could credited Stalling.
They could have contacted Warner Brothers.
They could have consulted with a cartoon expert.
They could have not used it.

You know we've told you before
But you didn't hear us then
So you still question why
No! You didn't listen again
You didn't listen again

[JKL2000]

Has hip-hop been made without sampling?

I have no idea, as I can't distinguish hip-hop from rap. To me, rap is when they sing about good things, like sneakers and food.

[Plasmatopia]

Yes, lots. The current Tonight Show house band The Roots is an example.

I assumed the answer was yes. It's not like sampling is in some way essential to making hip-hop in that case but accepted practice within the genre (and others).

[Yodelgoat]

Like it or not, Germany has spoken.

I have spent a fair amount of time with creating samples, and I would be upset if someone used a sample of a song mine, and made money from it. Samples can be very difficult to get right, but I assumed that was part of the "Art" of hip-hop. Apparently its just stealing stuff as it is and using it for yourself. I thought there was more to sampling, than just grabbing a sound and playing it. I've always thought You should morph sounds you find into something that is uniquely your own. Why would you even want to use something exactly as it was? Especially if its recognizable.

I created numerous samples as unique ways to move from one song into another, and I spent months getting them right - changing the original clip (which may be a conversation, or a drum loop or sound I recorded myself) into something more interesting - and unrecognizable from its original. I once grabbed a sample of the end of Alice Coopers "Raped and Freezin" and modified it and mixed it with other sounds, I changed every single nano second of that waveform in that sample and no way is anyone figuring out where I got that sound from.

I had a good experience with sampling on an album that you probably wouldn't expect to find it - It was completely devoid of the stereotypes of what most sampling has become.

Kraftwerk was ripped off. Dont sell your stuff in Germany if you dont want it ripped off. I imagine that US courts would never follow that ruling. But I'm not a Lawyer, and so what I think is probably wrong. Sorry Kraftwerk.

[GuitarGeek]

They could credited Stalling.
They could have contacted Warner Brothers.
They could have consulted with a cartoon expert.
They could have not used it.

They could credited Stalling.
Why credit Stalling? It wasn't his composition. It was a well known fact that Stalling used a lot of pilfered music in his scores (consider the use of Grieg in any Looney Tune to signify "morning", for instance).

They could have contacted Warner Brothers.

Maybe they called Warner Brothers, but couldn't get the answers they were looking for. Come to think of it, I'm not sure how Warners would be able to else. I mean, you expect a random secretary at Warner Brothers' music publishing division, circa 1978 (probably still the same now) is gonna know off the top of his/her head that the "crazy machinery music" from the Looney Tunes is a Raymond Scott piece? I might believe that today there's probably a database somewhere (maybe even on a website) that lists all the musical pieces that appeared in each Looney Tune, but in 1978?

They could have consulted with a cartoon expert.

Define "cartoon expert". What's a cartoon expert going to know but what's listed in the credits?! Unless you hear the music in another context (say the Grieg piece I mentioned earlier), how are you going to know where Stalling got a given piece of music.

They could have not used it.

So you'd tell them to throw out a 9 minute piece of music, because they couldn't verify where the melodic motif in question came from?!

A further option would have been for them to be truthful when asked about La Villa Strangiato, which I believe they always where, viz-a-viz the bit we're talking about. They always said it came from the Looney Tunes, and when it was finally brought to their attention the true provenance of said motif, they donated money (which they weren't legally obligated to do) to the Scott estate, to restore the balance of justice, as it were.

It just drives me nuts I was listening to Hemispheres for over a decade before I realized what that riff was. Not because it was a Raymond Scott piece, but because I watched those cartoons religiously when I was little. I should have recognized it as the "crazy machinery" music.

[Facelift]

We're not talking about melody here, or even lyrics. Samples are too short to violate the copyrights on music and lyrics.

We're talking about recordings. Recordings are a composite of multiple elements that can be as individual and identifiable as fingerprints, even in a short sample.

If the sample's source is not identifiable, there's no real issue. But when it is, it was probably chosen and used because it is identifiable. It is intrinsically meaningful in some way that's unique to the sample and its source; if not, there would be no point in using it.

If the sample has intrinsic value, then using it without permission is theft. This is a point that the judge failed to see, IMO.

Copyright infringement - even if an entire song is copied outright - is still not "theft." As soon as someone starts using the term "theft" in a copyright case, you know where their biases and knowledge gaps are.

[alucard]

I have no idea, as I can't distinguish hip-hop from rap. To me, rap is when they sing about good things, like sneakers and food.

"While often used to refer to rapping, "hip hop" more properly denotes the practice of the entire subculture.The term hip hop music is sometimes used synonymously with the term rap music, though rapping is not a required component of hip hop music; the genre may also incorporate other elements of hip hop culture, including DJing, turntablism, and scratching, beatboxing, and instrumental tracks."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hip_hop_music

[A. Scherze]

OK, I just be a Devil's Advocate regarding Rush. If I was in their situation, I would have done the same thing.
(Back in the '80s, I messed around with combining "Powerhouse" with Hovhaness' "Macedonian Mountain Dance".)

Other options I forgot to list:
contacting ASCAP, BMI, or Harry Fox
crowd sourcing: announcements during concerts and radio interviews
letters to Bugs Bunny fan clubs

And, while a random clerk might not know what they were asking about, they could probably refer them to the right department in
Warner Bros to answer the question.

When I said to not use it, obviously, I meant to edit out the offending section, not the whole piece.

As for cartoon experts, just as with any other field, there are people who research it.
For example, in 1975, "Tex Avery, King of Cartoons" was published.

As for giving money to the Scott estate, that's nice. However, Scott died in '94.
(And, anyway, WB owned the rights.)

[A. Scherze]

I think that if I released music for public consumption that I would allow anyone to sample whatever they wanted, provided that I received proper credit.

This is my personal position regarding only me and not applicable to anyone else.

[JKL2000]

It just drives me nuts I was listening to Hemispheres for over a decade before I realized what that riff was. Not because it was a Raymond Scott piece, but because I watched those cartoons religiously when I was little. I should have recognized it as the "crazy machinery" music.

Not to brag (I'm sure I'm far from the only one) but I recognized the music right away, and thought it was very cool that they used it.

[JKL2000]

Copyright infringement - even if an entire song is copied outright - is still not "theft." As soon as someone starts using the term "theft" in a copyright case, you know where their biases and knowledge gaps are.

Are you Nestor? Maybe someone already mentioned this.

[JKL2000]

"While often used to refer to rapping, "hip hop" more properly denotes the practice of the entire subculture.The term hip hop music is sometimes used synonymously with the term rap music, though rapping is not a required component of hip hop music; the genre may also incorporate other elements of hip hop culture, including DJing, turntablism, and scratching, beatboxing, and instrumental tracks."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hip_hop_music

I've used a turntable in the past, therefore, I am part of hip hop subculture.

LOL - subculture! I wear brand new baseball caps with giant visors and all the tags still attached - I'm part of the hip hop subculture.

[moecurlythanu]

Are you Nestor? Maybe someone already mentioned this.

Go back to sleep, Rip!

[JKL2000]

I actually think using a single quote from another song in your song simply as a reference to the original - the way Rush did as mentioned above, and as Men At Work did with Kookaburra - should really just be allowed to do for free. It's a clear reference to someone else's work, not using it as a crutch for your own new work. Of course, you could have a problem where someone uses it in a white supremacist song and then the artist of the quoted work is upset. So I guess getting permission is good. But I really thought Men At Work got a raw deal when they had to pay lots of back royalty for a reference that probably if anything helped promote that song (Kookaburra) and also Australia!

[JKL2000]

Go back to sleep, Rip!

Is that a yes?

[Halmyre]

I actually think using a single quote from another song in your song simply as a reference to the original - the way Rush did as mentioned above, and as Men At Work did with Kookaburra - should really just be allowed to do for free. It's a clear reference to someone else's work, not using it as a crutch for your own new work. Of course, you could have a problem where someone uses it in a white supremacist song and then the artist of the quoted work is upset. So I guess getting permission is good. But I really thought Men At Work got a raw deal when they had to pay lots of back royalty for a reference that probably if anything helped promote that song (Kookaburra) and also Australia!

Plus, IIRC, it was payment to someone who had no connection to the original other than that they had only recently bought up the publishing rights.

[GuitarGeek]

Not to brag (I'm sure I'm far from the only one) but I recognized the music right away, and thought it was very cool that they used it.

Well, bully for you that you and and everyone else is oh so intelligent and clever that you recognized the riff immediately.

[JKL2000]

Well, bully for you that you and and everyone else is oh so intelligent and clever that you recognized the riff immediately.

Hey, I tried to let you down easy! Did you know there's a bit of the 1812 Overture in the 2112 Overture?

[rdclark]

Copyright infringement - even if an entire song is copied outright - is still not "theft." As soon as someone starts using the term "theft" in a copyright case, you know where their biases and knowledge gaps are.

Taking something of mine without permission and using it for your own purposes. You're the thief, I'm the victim. I'll call it what it is, and f**k your semantics.

[Facelift]

Taking something of mine without permission and using it for your own purposes. You're the thief, I'm the victim. I'll call it what it is, and f**k your semantics.

It's not semantics. Nothing is being "taken" in a copyright infringement matter. You still have everything that you started with before the infringement occurred. Sorry you're having a difficult time with these concepts.

[chalkpie]

Kraftwerk win 20-year sampling case over Metal On Metal

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-49162546

[Zeuhlmate]

2 seconds huh ?

What says the rap artist?