Re: [microsound] sampling issues / motivations

[Ian Andrews <i.andrews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

chthonic streamswrote:


> this is a massive contradiction to me.  i know they're able to do
> this because a composition is considered different from a sound
> recording, but this most often ends up compensating the wrong people
> IMO.  if the laws are saying the identifiable aspect that makes it a
> particular piece is the composition rather than the timbre, then we
> end up with soundalikes, which aren't prosecutable.
> 
> example:  someone asks the band squeeze to do a commercial using one
> of their songs.  squeeze refuses.  the ad company then hires people
> to replicate the sound of squeeze perfectly, and write a song
> intentionally meant to sound like the song squeeze refused to give
> permission for.  same key, tempo, phrasing - but it's not the same
> notes or chords or words.  even though this practice is done to
> intentionally fool the public into thinking it is squeeze, or at
> least associate the squeeze sound with a particular product, that is
> perfectly legal, even though it has no artistic merit and is recorded
> strictly for commercial use to generate a profit.
> 
> meanwhile, someone who uses a tiny sample creatively, as a part of
> their whole work, whether making a profit or not, can be sued and
> blocked from using it.  this is fucked.

Agree. The mass media industry has capitalised on this legal loophole for
decades.  Most stock-music is essentially the commissioning of sound-alikes.
Change a note here and there, modify the arrangement a bit and its all
perfectly legal. Also during the Cold War, releases from behind the Iron
Curtain could be legally used in Western film television and radio
productions, in their entirety without obtaining copyright clearance (at
least that was the case in the US, the UK and Australia). I wonder if this
loophole still applies to so-called pariah states such as Cuba and North
Korea.

But as concerns sampling, I think there are at least three completely
different practices out there and each needs to be considered separately.

1. Obvious sampling, eg. Jon Oswald (Plunderphonics) Culturecide,
Deconstructing Beck, through to Thomas Brinkman's Soul Centre series. These
pieces announce their appropriation up front. There is no effort to conceal
the source material, and in these works it could be said that sampling <is>
the point.

2. Short samples which are used in combination with other sounds or samples
from other material to create a recombinatory work where the emphasis is on
juxtaposition, collision, mixing and mutating of elements. In these works
the samples are often obscured, cut up, processesd, granulated beyond
recognition. Although there is often a conscious attempt to hide the act of
sampling, the decision to do this has been largely motivated by a compulsion
to creatively deform the source material rather than fear of reprisals.

3. Outright theft. The sampling of large elements such as entire basslines.
Here the there are two categories one legal, the other illegal. In both
cases it is often the case that the sampler wishes to obtain credit for the
work of the samplee. In other words, they hoping to get away with something.
This often occurs to some extent even in cases of legal (cleared) sampling
because the samplee is only credited in the fine print of the album cover.
We now see monstrous combinations of remix, sample and cover-version in
which the boundaries are extremely blurred because the legality of the
cleared sample seems to permit the complete appropriation of another's work
for a fee (to the record company). These tracks sound like a remix, or a
cover version yet they have do not have the same title as the original and
they are not classed as a remix, hence there is no reference to the original
work except in the fine print of the album cover.


Of course the distinction between these categories is often blurred. For
example, the above mentioned "Soul Centre" recordings could easily fall into
all three categories.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org