DJ Excellence
ILLIEN
Even by Excellence standards ... that Michael McDonald sample is very LONG lol. He was looking for it.
Sample Clearance
- Thread starter Kaleidon
- Start date
-
warzone (nov 5-9) signup begins in...
True...Imagine MM pimping WG's "Regulator" like that... it's just a bad move imo, especially if you're trying to do big things. If you're just having fun with it then NO, you'd be a fool to get sample clearance.
Have you guys noticed that alot (if not all) Sponsored Beat Contests require you (the producer) to submit 100% original stuff to enter? They DON'T want samples of anything, not even a hhat. Ish like this is the reason why.
Have you guys noticed that alot (if not all) Sponsored Beat Contests require you (the producer) to submit 100% original stuff to enter? They DON'T want samples of anything, not even a hhat. Ish like this is the reason why.
DJ Excellence
ILLIEN
Ya that song basically killed Biz' career.
"I Need a Haircut sales were already low when Markie was served a lawsuit by Gilbert O'Sullivan, who claimed that the album's Alone Again featured an unauthorized sample from his hit "Alone Again (Naturally)". O'Sullivan's claim was upheld in a landmark ruling, Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc.,[5] that altered the landscape of hip-hop, finding that all samples must be cleared with the original artist before being used. In accordance with the ruling, Warner Bros., the parent company of Cold Chillin', had to pull I Need a Haircut from circulation, and all companies had to clear samples with the samples' creators before releasing the records. This development reflected the increasing popularity of hip-hop and the financial stakes over which releases were set. Biz responded in 1993 with the mischievously titled All Samples Cleared!, but his career had been hurt by the publicity emanating from the lawsuit, and the record suffered accordingly. "
Source: Wikipedia
"I Need a Haircut sales were already low when Markie was served a lawsuit by Gilbert O'Sullivan, who claimed that the album's Alone Again featured an unauthorized sample from his hit "Alone Again (Naturally)". O'Sullivan's claim was upheld in a landmark ruling, Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc.,[5] that altered the landscape of hip-hop, finding that all samples must be cleared with the original artist before being used. In accordance with the ruling, Warner Bros., the parent company of Cold Chillin', had to pull I Need a Haircut from circulation, and all companies had to clear samples with the samples' creators before releasing the records. This development reflected the increasing popularity of hip-hop and the financial stakes over which releases were set. Biz responded in 1993 with the mischievously titled All Samples Cleared!, but his career had been hurt by the publicity emanating from the lawsuit, and the record suffered accordingly. "
Source: Wikipedia
StressWon
www.stress1.com
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 68
agreed, unless moving a million joints, I wouldnt worry bout it
thedreampolice
A backwards poet writes inverse.
RJD2 on sample clearance
"my views on this are directly related to the current state of the music industry. namely 2 big things:
1-your average indie record is lucky to recoup expenses. if it generates 10-30k, that's an indie win.
2-big labels are slashing staff left and right, with not much hope of this turning around.
SO, with that said here's how i feel: dont bother clearing a sample if you would be the one paying for it. i think its insane, personally. if a LABEL would be paying for it, then it makes sense, cause they will have the money, and more so, they will have PROJECTED SALES TO COVER THIS COST.
i am going to open myself up here for a huge flame war, hopefully not, but when i see people advise to "always clear samples", i see them as speaking from a POV that has a dog in the hunt either way. they probably have more experiences with-or AS-folks who wrote music 30 years ago, hear sampling, and think of puffy/diana ross, and ASSUME THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER IS STILL GETTING SHAFTED.
i dont care to enter into a semantic debate about "art and sampling". im strictly speaking from a POV of the simple economics of it.
and the simple economics of it are this: if you are releasing an indie project, bottom line, its easier to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission. and this has to mostly do with the fact that 90% of copyright holders want an advance on sales to sample something. but it just doesnt make sense in this economy.
now, the other side of the coin: if you actually generate some money on a record, and manage to get it out of the label, then i feel it is only right to do what you can to reimburse, or try to, the copyright holder(im calling them CH's from now on). at the very least, dont be surprised if they find out and come after you.
i know this all might sound very ****ed up and immoral to some people, but the bottom line for me is that i hold the artistic statements of things like nation of millions, endtroducing, de la soul is dead, etc in a higher creative regard than i do their power as a commodity. so, if a few CH's might get infringed upon (in a global sense) for our culture to produce works of art like that, i consider it a net win from the utilitarianism standpoint. they, in highsight, shouldered a huge litigious burden, but in turn, gave us something that solder boy tell them will never ever even bother to give us, and technically, CANT.
i want to be clear-i have no disdain for any CH's, and i hope they are all filthy rich already. BUT, im a touring musician. i never had someone spend a quarter mil promoting an album of mine. i know that if a record wins or loses, its because i A)busted MY ass, toured all year, promoted the record, handled my biz, didnt waste time getting ****ed up every night, etc, NOT cause i was a lazy **** who happened to find an unused bob james loop first.
lets flip it around: FF. im now 55-60. i've had 25-35 years to tour, sell, license, and generally profit off of my own record. some young kid samples a portion of my record, makes a song out of it. if it generates $500k, then yes, i think i deserve a portion of that. but 50k? 5k? at which point are you just splitting hairs? these are valid viewpoints that IME don't get explored."
"my views on this are directly related to the current state of the music industry. namely 2 big things:
1-your average indie record is lucky to recoup expenses. if it generates 10-30k, that's an indie win.
2-big labels are slashing staff left and right, with not much hope of this turning around.
SO, with that said here's how i feel: dont bother clearing a sample if you would be the one paying for it. i think its insane, personally. if a LABEL would be paying for it, then it makes sense, cause they will have the money, and more so, they will have PROJECTED SALES TO COVER THIS COST.
i am going to open myself up here for a huge flame war, hopefully not, but when i see people advise to "always clear samples", i see them as speaking from a POV that has a dog in the hunt either way. they probably have more experiences with-or AS-folks who wrote music 30 years ago, hear sampling, and think of puffy/diana ross, and ASSUME THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER IS STILL GETTING SHAFTED.
i dont care to enter into a semantic debate about "art and sampling". im strictly speaking from a POV of the simple economics of it.
and the simple economics of it are this: if you are releasing an indie project, bottom line, its easier to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission. and this has to mostly do with the fact that 90% of copyright holders want an advance on sales to sample something. but it just doesnt make sense in this economy.
now, the other side of the coin: if you actually generate some money on a record, and manage to get it out of the label, then i feel it is only right to do what you can to reimburse, or try to, the copyright holder(im calling them CH's from now on). at the very least, dont be surprised if they find out and come after you.
i know this all might sound very ****ed up and immoral to some people, but the bottom line for me is that i hold the artistic statements of things like nation of millions, endtroducing, de la soul is dead, etc in a higher creative regard than i do their power as a commodity. so, if a few CH's might get infringed upon (in a global sense) for our culture to produce works of art like that, i consider it a net win from the utilitarianism standpoint. they, in highsight, shouldered a huge litigious burden, but in turn, gave us something that solder boy tell them will never ever even bother to give us, and technically, CANT.
i want to be clear-i have no disdain for any CH's, and i hope they are all filthy rich already. BUT, im a touring musician. i never had someone spend a quarter mil promoting an album of mine. i know that if a record wins or loses, its because i A)busted MY ass, toured all year, promoted the record, handled my biz, didnt waste time getting ****ed up every night, etc, NOT cause i was a lazy **** who happened to find an unused bob james loop first.
lets flip it around: FF. im now 55-60. i've had 25-35 years to tour, sell, license, and generally profit off of my own record. some young kid samples a portion of my record, makes a song out of it. if it generates $500k, then yes, i think i deserve a portion of that. but 50k? 5k? at which point are you just splitting hairs? these are valid viewpoints that IME don't get explored."
I agree with what RJD2 is saying but I still disagree with his logic...I mean who makes a song shooting for the 50K (or less) mark in sales? Even if thats the norm for a very solid track...is that where you aim your goals? I know there are alot of cats that will settle and be happy doing that consistently. Yet at the same time, have a goal to be another JayZ or even exceed him. I fully understand the logic but I (personally) just couldn't settle like that. If I'm gonna do it, I'm shooting for the stars.
Here's another thing... What if you made a joint that was a multi-million dollar hit, would you be happy with a 50K paycheck for it? If so, you're the perfect fool for a record label, indie or anyone else in the game to rape you! Then why set your goals and be content at under succeeding? To me thats like saying..."I'd rather go home at the end of the day knowing that I got royally fug'd because it pays better than McDonalds". I'm sorry but I've got too much pride for that ish. Yes, I'd rather work at McDonalds and be broke than let someone screw the ish out of me and have a little change in my pocket.
Here's another thing... What if you made a joint that was a multi-million dollar hit, would you be happy with a 50K paycheck for it? If so, you're the perfect fool for a record label, indie or anyone else in the game to rape you! Then why set your goals and be content at under succeeding? To me thats like saying..."I'd rather go home at the end of the day knowing that I got royally fug'd because it pays better than McDonalds". I'm sorry but I've got too much pride for that ish. Yes, I'd rather work at McDonalds and be broke than let someone screw the ish out of me and have a little change in my pocket.
thedreampolice
A backwards poet writes inverse.
I don't think he is shooting for that, per se. But just looking at the reality of the situation.
It depends on several factors...Mainly if the owner decides to sue you or not. That is if you're selling a beat with someones else's copyrighted material in it. One of the misconceptions is...they won't bother you unless you are making some big bank off it. That may be true to a degree BUT they still CAN sue you, big bank or not, if you use copyrighted work. Judging from the times, I would say "don't do it", people are reaching new lows everyday when it comes to a dollar.
Then you have to take into account who the music belongs to. There are some cats out there like Prince, Rick James (RIP) and others that are known to have no tolerance for it.
One other 'obstacle' is...there are usually 2 copyright owners...1 for the lyrics and the other for the mastering/music of the track.
In my opinion...it's just too risky in today's times...It's some real corny people out there when it comes to copyrighted material...and I'm not speaking on something that I read, I'm talking from first hand experience. I've never been sued or anything like that but I've witnessed people saying "hey this is mine and you can't use it", and it wasn't even material for sale...lol. Shady mofo's!
Then you have to take into account who the music belongs to. There are some cats out there like Prince, Rick James (RIP) and others that are known to have no tolerance for it.
One other 'obstacle' is...there are usually 2 copyright owners...1 for the lyrics and the other for the mastering/music of the track.
In my opinion...it's just too risky in today's times...It's some real corny people out there when it comes to copyrighted material...and I'm not speaking on something that I read, I'm talking from first hand experience. I've never been sued or anything like that but I've witnessed people saying "hey this is mine and you can't use it", and it wasn't even material for sale...lol. Shady mofo's!
Let's say you do it ahead of time.. what's the range of pricing for sample clearance? I'm aware it can go up to 100% plus a huge advance, but like what would be a more normal amount to pay for an indie label to clear a slightly obscure sample? Would you have the artist take care of the fee? i.e. I'll sell you the beat if you clear the sample
thedreampolice
A backwards poet writes inverse.
ok here is the best rule of thumb I have found. If your record will sell less than 50k copies, don't even worry about it PERIOD. If it will be licensed to sell for TV, Film and sell over 50k get a lawyer working on this NOW!
There is no set price, there's no guessing either. It will be totally up to the copyright owner/s. They usually want to hear your material first, then they look at things like...how much you used, the way you used it, how often it's used in your beat, how recognizable it is and so on... and decide from there.
I agree, I think he is more a realist. And being an independent he should know what sort of returns to expect. I sort of agree with him, but at the same time as a producer its hard when all the a&r's want is composed unsampled material.
Wow I had a guy do that to me recently and I was starting to thing about shooting him, so I wouldnt say thats a great idea to copy it too well.
I personally would change the beat and derive off of the chords.