Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

I can't speak for Johnny H or his record company's ethical or moral values, or indeed their commercial practices, but I have made the position and view of Sound On Sound on this matter very clear earlier in this thread.

Everything else is the personal opinions of the individual forum users and, by signing up to the forums, they take full responsibility for those opinions and any advice they offer.

---

Good plan, Hugh!
It's a strategy that has worked well in the past for Pirate Bay, Kim-dot-Com and other interweb publishers

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Quote hollowsun:

---

A lot gets lost in the dull exchange of text (plus it's often hard to know when you, Mr H, are delivering opinion as 'facts' or being humorous!).

---

I recon Mr H is usually "being humorous"...

Yes, and he's not being atechnogirl.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Quote chris...:

---

Quote atechnogirl:

---

I have a record company

---

Quote atechnogirl:

---

I run a record company

---

As you keep reminding us. Maybe you're out to out-narco narco!

---

I don't even know what that means.

Quote feline1:

---

Yes, and he's not being atechnogirl.

---

And I don't know what that means.

I think Feline meant to write "When he's not being atechnogirl", ie. you're Johnny H's sockpuppet (even though you're clearly not.)

Quote Scramble:

---

I think Feline meant to write "When he's not being atechnogirl", ie. you're Johnny H's sockpuppet (even though you're clearly not.)

---

No I mean literally what I said. It's just a coincidence that they all pop up in the same threads typing the same type of stuff. Why can't people just accept that?

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Maybe they just don't care... I know I don't... And by your logic the fact that you also appear in the same company so regularly must surely mean you're another fictitious trolling character.

Life is way too short to pay any attention to anonymous forum posters. How about discussing the topic rather than the posters?

Hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

These kinds of threads are always really interesting for this reason: none of us who are composers, artists, songwriters, etc., want our material pirated/stolen/torrented/downloaded for free. So it's always interesting to see a vehement defense of artists doing the same thing, but to larger entities, in some of these SOS threads. Which suggests that the common thought is, "It's not OK to have it done to you if you're the little guy, but it's OK to go ahead and do it if you're the little guy taking from the big guy." Which begs the question, "At what point have you crossed the threshold from being the little guy to being the big guy?" because that whole line of thinking implies an existing line between little guy and big guy. If you're little guy stealing from big guy, at what point will you stop? When you're making £100/month from your music? £500? £1000? Does that threshold become £5000 if you perceive that the entity is an evil one like an EMI, or maybe £10,000 if you perceive them to be a behemoth like the BBC?

A little extra practical info from the US side of things, if you're pulling from US-made movies or TV shows: sampling a line of dialog involves more potential risk and liability than just a letter from a lawyer saying "cease and desist." Pull a line from the movie and you're on the hook for claims not only from the studio and the talent themselves (and SAG), but from the WGA who reps that writer, and the DGA who reps the film's director.

I'm with Hugh: best to just not go there.

Kerry

Quote Eastcoaster NYC:

---

These kinds of threads are always really interesting for this reason: none of us who are composers, artists, songwriters, etc., want our material pirated/stolen/torrented/downloaded for free. So it's always interesting to see a vehement defense of artists doing the same thing, but to larger entities, in some of these SOS threads. Which suggests that the common thought is, "It's not OK to have it done to you if you're the little guy, but it's OK to go ahead and do it if you're the little guy taking from the big guy." Which begs the question, "At what point have you crossed the threshold from being the little guy to being the big guy?" because that whole line of thinking implies an existing line between little guy and big guy. If you're little guy stealing from big guy, at what point will you stop? When you're making £100/month from your music? £500? £1000? Does that threshold become £5000 if you perceive that the entity is an evil one like an EMI, or maybe £10,000 if you perceive them to be a behemoth like the BBC?

---

I think you are slightly misreading the point...

A fair royalty is a fair royalty, but the chances of getting one diminish when you are dealing with people who have significantly more money than you. If you wish to clear a sample from a big label they can demand quite obscene amounts of money. The odds are always stacked up against the little guy.

As I posted earlier (before all that conspiracy theory nonsense), it works both ways. My friend who had a very well respected post-punk band back in the 80s were sampled by an extremely big electronic act who subsequently refused to acknowledge them or give them any royalties whatsoever. They simply rerecorded the part and the band were unable to pay the legal fees to fight the label.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Maybe they just don't care... I know I don't... And by your logic the fact that you also appear in the same company so regularly must surely mean you're another fictitious trolling character.

Life is way too short to pay any attention to anonymous forum posters. How about discussing the topic rather than the posters?

Hugh

---

Absolutely Hugh and let's not forget we have a very handy button which allows us to ignore certain posters!

Quote johnny h:

---

Quote Eastcoaster NYC:

---

These kinds of threads are always really interesting for this reason: none of us who are composers, artists, songwriters, etc., want our material pirated/stolen/torrented/downloaded for free. So it's always interesting to see a vehement defense of artists doing the same thing, but to larger entities, in some of these SOS threads. Which suggests that the common thought is, "It's not OK to have it done to you if you're the little guy, but it's OK to go ahead and do it if you're the little guy taking from the big guy." Which begs the question, "At what point have you crossed the threshold from being the little guy to being the big guy?" because that whole line of thinking implies an existing line between little guy and big guy. If you're little guy stealing from big guy, at what point will you stop? When you're making £100/month from your music? £500? £1000? Does that threshold become £5000 if you perceive that the entity is an evil one like an EMI, or maybe £10,000 if you perceive them to be a behemoth like the BBC?

---

I think you are slightly misreading the point...

A fair royalty is a fair royalty, but the chances of getting one diminish when you are dealing with people who have significantly more money than you. If you wish to clear a sample from a big label they can demand quite obscene amounts of money. The odds are always stacked up against the little guy.

---

I don't think I missed the point at all: as copyright holders, they can charge whatever they want for a use of a sample, just as we as copyright holders (artists, composers, songwriters) can charge whatever WE want to charge for the same thing, or for a license fee for use in a program, etc. The fact that the little guy can't afford it is not justification for stealing it. Your argument in the post just above seems to hinge on that exact point: since the little guy can't afford it because the big guy wants too much money for it, then the little guy should be allowed to just take it. Which kinda brings me back to my original point: at what point are you no longer the little guy, and what threshold suddenly makes the other guy the big guy? You say "a fair royalty is a fair royalty" - but what if the little guy can't afford the fair royalty? Is that OK to then steal it, even if the royalty is deemed by you to be fair, because he can't afford it?

Kerry

Quote johnny h:

---

I think you are slightly misreading the point...

A fair royalty is a fair royalty, but the chances of getting one diminish when you are dealing with people who have significantly more money than you. If you wish to clear a sample from a big label they can demand quite obscene amounts of money. The odds are always stacked up against the little guy.

---

such is life in general. Prettier boys get prettier girls. Muscle men can pick up heavier weights. taller people can reach higher shelves.....

Labels aren't without niceties though.... It all comes down to your skill as a negotiator and how you turn things to your advantage.

Quote johnny h:

---

As I posted earlier (before all that conspiracy theory nonsense), it works both ways. My friend who had a very well respected post-punk band back in the 80s were sampled by an extremely big electronic act who subsequently refused to acknowledge them or give them any royalties whatsoever. They simply rerecorded the part and the band were unable to pay the legal fees to fight the label.

---

rerecording the part isn't saying. they would only be entitled to royalties from a cowrite. You don't need huge legal fees to go for royalties.... You talk to the MCPS and MU. And you use your skills as a negotiator!!! Did the post punk boy go in hardball? If there is a genuine case point me to it..... Ill get the money!!

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Maybe they just don't care... I know I don't... And by your logic the fact that you also appear in the same company so regularly must surely mean you're another fictitious trolling character.

---

I don't express the same views, and I don't use the same prose style. I also appear as Feline1 all over the internets and have done so since about 1998.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

My heart bleeds for these poor artists who can't write their own tunes or come up with their own sounds. Why isn't there a smiley for sobbing? I might have to draw a painting of a dove and a teddy crying to express my sadness. (I can't draw very well, though, so perhaps I'll just copy someone else's).

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Life is way too short to pay any attention to anonymous forum posters. How about discussing the topic

---

Sounds good - except that IMHO there appears to be some benefit to identifying those who ( under whatever alias(es) ) frequently and deliberately post misleading info, presumably in an attempt to cause confusion and/or stir things up.

( you guys know who you are )

I find this type of "reputation" info makes it a helluva lot easier to know what weight to attribute to which posts, and therefore my understanding of the topic is improved. Which is nice.

Quote narcoman:

---

rerecording the part isn't saying. they would only be entitled to royalties from a cowrite. You don't need huge legal fees to go for royalties.... You talk to the MCPS and MU. And you use your skills as a negotiator!!! Did the post punk boy go in hardball? If there is a genuine case point me to it..... Ill get the money!!

---

PM sent

I have the same problem.
My album has samples mainly from the 1950s - US ads, US and British TV, film speech samples and David Starkey!!

How do I go about finding out who owns the copyright to get clearance - most were sampled from off-air videos taped in the 80s and 90s?

My experience of samples, work like this...Ann Peebles tiny sample..ask EMI nicely...they wanted 100 percent mechanicals, we said ok and failed to register it. Use your music as an advert and make your money from the gigs. There are so many bandits in the industry, so learn how to be one!

Having just read back this thread, where people who earn no money attack atechngirl (me) I wonder if this is a good forum to be on when you are starting out. Trust nobody and be clever.

Edited by balvenie (24/11/12 11:16 PM)

Quote balvenie:

---

My experience of samples, work like this...Ann Peebles tiny sample..ask EMI nicely...they wanted 100 percent mechanicals, we said ok and failed to register it. Use your music as an advert and make your money from the gigs. There are so many bandits in the industry, so learn how to be one!

Having just read back this thread, where people who earn no money attack atechngirl (me) I wonder if this is a good forum to be on when you are starting out. Trust nobody and be clever.

---

Its clear gigs are where the money is for a lot of artists but I wouldn't worry about being super paranoid. Just get some good people around you (in the real world) who know what they are talking about. And listen to them.

Quote balvenie:

---

My experience of samples, work like this...Ann Peebles tiny sample..ask EMI nicely...they wanted 100 percent mechanicals,

---

I've always found the majors to be a bit crap with the little things - so not surprising really. They somewhat lack vision.

Quote balvenie:

---

we said ok and failed to register it.

---

..pretty much what I did in the past - although not really the right thing to do. Learned the hard way after selling a lot of records with a sample in; it bites very hard once you're noticed (and cost me a lot). I guess its a judgement call for every artist to make on a case by case basis.... the only advice I'd be prepared to put my name to (anonymous or otherwise) is "clear it or don't use it".

Quote balvenie:

---

Use your music as an advert and make your money from the gigs. There are so many bandits in the industry, so learn how to be one!

---

I dunno. Know where you're coming from but fighting fire with fire is hard work - and in the scheme of things its not really a route to money for this simple reason; as soon as there IS money you'll get some variant of legal action (or the threat of some that will never materialise). What WILL happen is the label will get an injunction against the label trading. Then a whole pain in the ass happens and the label will find it's artists not being very friendly anymore. If you're self releasing then you can make your own judgements.

Further - when you deal with the sort of projects I do (or rather my company does) it is very unwise to warrant an uncleared track for use in a movie, advert or video game and take the bucks whilst providing them (the film company with big lawyers and insurance) with an uncleared track. At best it's "pay the damages".

Quote balvenie:

---

Having just read back this thread, where people who earn no money attack atechngirl (me)

---

Most of A-Girls posts were very very useful but were unfortunately over-shadowed by contributions of "you're all too old " or "you don't earn money". Pity really.

Quote balvenie:

---

I wonder if this is a good forum to be on when you are starting out.

---

It's good for novices and experts alike. It's not so good for "grinding axes".

Quote balvenie:

---

Trust nobody and be clever.

---

Be clever - absolutely. Trust no-one? Learn who TO trust is better advice.

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote balvenie:

---

Trust nobody and be clever.

---

Be clever - absolutely. Trust no-one? Learn who TO trust is better advice.

---

That is good advice yes. There are some people who really know their stuff. If you get them on your side it will help a lot. Paranoia and mistrust is not the way forward.

Quote atechnogirl:

---

If you are a label in the underground I would just go ahead and release it, and I can guarantee you won't be in court because they only look for hits and the chance of money. Admittedly, this could happen, so deal with it by disolving the label if need be, but that is extreme and unlikely to happen. Meanwhile, your name is out there and you will be on your way.

---

Unless you're gonna be making serious money, this is the way to go IMO ^

Looking at it from the artistic perspective... if an artist takes cuttings from a newspaper and includes them in a collage (with the words clearly legible still) is he expected to get the authority of the writer of each newspaper article before displaying his work of art? Or just get on with it?

Using anonymous sound samples to create a completely new piece of work is arguably the musical equivalent of the above....depends how much of the original is used.

Using a clearly recognisable sample extensively, or a well known celebrity voice, and basing a piece on that is another matter if it's the main focus. As someone else said, it's a judgement call.

If you make any money, they'll find you

--------------------

Quote GlynB:

---

Quote atechnogirl:

---

If you are a label in the underground I would just go ahead and release it, and I can guarantee you won't be in court because they only look for hits and the chance of money. Admittedly, this could happen, so deal with it by disolving the label if need be, but that is extreme and unlikely to happen. Meanwhile, your name is out there and you will be on your way.

---

Unless you're gonna be making serious money, this is the way to go IMO ^

---

The problem with giving that sort of advice is simple; One is now part of the circle of endorsement and if there is a problem One has entered into liability. It matters not one jot that most will do it that way; but it is an inadvisable thing to enter into print such traceable advice! No hit? No problem... nobody cares.... big hit? uh oh....For your own protection; don't offer advice that flows contra to the law even though you may say different down the pub. Copyright is a hot potato at the moment and sooner or later this WILL smack someone on the butt.

As for "dissolving a label" to get out of liability? Bad advice. You may still be personally liable.

Quote GlynB:

---

Looking at it from the artistic perspective... if an artist takes cuttings from a newspaper and includes them in a collage (with the words clearly legible still) is he expected to get the authority of the writer of each newspaper article before displaying his work of art? Or just get on with it?

---

As a piece of art then that would be up to each individual to complain. To USE said piece of art in a book or in a newspaper - different again. Tricky ground and there isn't a blanket response.

Suffice to say - the advice one may give down the pub is not really the same as putting it in print and the internet counts as print. I may well give very different advice "off the record". A forum is "print" and is used to varying degrees of success to point the finger of accusation.

Quote narcoman:

---

Quote GlynB:

---

Looking at it from the artistic perspective... if an artist takes cuttings from a newspaper and includes them in a collage (with the words clearly legible still) is he expected to get the authority of the writer of each newspaper article before displaying his work of art? Or just get on with it?

---

As a piece of art then that would be up to each individual to complain. To USE said piece of art in a book or in a newspaper - different again. Tricky ground and there isn't a blanket response.

Suffice to say - the advice one may give down the pub is not really the same as putting it in print and the internet counts as print. I may well give very different advice "off the record". A forum is "print" and is used to varying degrees of success to point the finger of accusation.

---

Point taken, especially true following recent events regarding a senior Tory politician!

--------------------