Harlem Shake: could it kill sampling?

[pete_bubonic]

That was a decent historical article I thought. Feels like the sensationalist headline and skew was added on for traffic but the actual content was well researched and relatively interesting.

Had Snake Eater become a worldwide phenomenon I'm sure we would have 1/ partied till we dropped and 2/ shit our pans about Kojima coming to kick up back doors in. But just like the article suggests, it's the breakout from the the underground, the freak success into mainstream knowledge that's caused problems. Though I'm sure it could all be settled with tossing the performers ten grand a piece, shit one of them even says, 'hey that's sampling, fair game!'.

So was the sample for Snake Eater just completely uncleared? Couldn't something so brazen have gotten you into some pretty deep shit? I'm unclear how copyright law works in the UK with regards to sampling.

I come from the camp of sample everything and anything. We make art, all of us, copyright should not get in the way of that. As a result you run the risk of getting in some shit. So yeah we coulda got stung by Snake Eater, but afaik, you can only get taken for the amount of money made, like that article implies, you bank on not making a big hit. Another later release we tried to clear a sample and the band wanted 25k for it. So we laughed and got a vocalist to rerecord the generic vocals and released it regardless.

[nowaysj]

tbh i dont get why people would wanna sue you over a 2-second drum sample like how it says in the article. Sure you might get money, but doesnt that make you feel incredibly selfish as an artist? I wouldnt push charges against something like that lol

If I could sue you for 200k for no reason, I would. I could use the cash.

How American of you.

Oh, you want some too? You got 200k to spare? A couple of my accounts were just frozen in Cyprus...

I really need the cash.

[fractal]

That was a decent historical article I thought. Feels like the sensationalist headline and skew was added on for traffic but the actual content was well researched and relatively interesting.

Had Snake Eater become a worldwide phenomenon I'm sure we would have 1/ partied till we dropped and 2/ shit our pans about Kojima coming to kick up back doors in. But just like the article suggests, it's the breakout from the the underground, the freak success into mainstream knowledge that's caused problems. Though I'm sure it could all be settled with tossing the performers ten grand a piece, shit one of them even says, 'hey that's sampling, fair game!'.

So was the sample for Snake Eater just completely uncleared? Couldn't something so brazen have gotten you into some pretty deep shit? I'm unclear how copyright law works in the UK with regards to sampling.

I come from the camp of sample everything and anything. We make art, all of us, copyright should not get in the way of that. As a result you run the risk of getting in some shit. So yeah we coulda got stung by Snake Eater, but afaik, you can only get taken for the amount of money made, like that article implies, you bank on not making a big hit. Another later release we tried to clear a sample and the band wanted 25k for it. So we laughed and got a vocalist to rerecord the generic vocals and released it regardless.

we share the same attitude when it comes to sampling

[Pedro Sánchez]

we share the same attitude when it comes to sampling

does that attitude apply to piracy?
edit: Not trying to be a dick btw, just interested to know if you draw parallels. In the past I remember you having strong opinions on piracy fractal.

[pembroke]

Pedro mindz war cuz