Fucking hell Max, just let it go. Don't know why you care so much, really.

Clovis, are you sure the MGMT samples weren't cleared? I could be wrong, but I think they mentioned on the label showcase podcast that the MGMT guys lived next door or on the same street as them and they had no problem with it. Sure, it wasn't a formal clearing per se, but at least there was some sort of verbal agreement that they were cool with the whole thing.

___________________

My Set Archive - MY BLOG

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis Did you actually read the text there? According to them even .5 seconds of "sampled" material is illegal. Do you realize how much music that wipes out right there? This has been and always will be a massive grey area in the music business.

I didn't, I'm at work and figured it could wait until later, but now I guess I won't bother. I still don't know what the deal is besides it being a "gray area," which seems pretty ridiculous for a billion dollar industry to have such a glaring ambiguity, but thats life I guess.

Either way, if I were to pull together the info just from this thread, it would seem that sampling without credit (length of sample undetermined) is in fact illegal, but the vast majority of the time nobody gives a fuck. Close enough?

___________________
My Soundcloud

quote:

Originally posted by Sadface I didn't, I'm at work and figured it could wait until later, but now I guess I won't bother. I still don't know what the deal is besides it being a "gray area," which seems pretty ridiculous for a billion dollar industry to have such a glaring ambiguity, but thats life I guess. Either way, if I were to pull together the info just from this thread, it would seem that sampling without credit (length of sample undetermined) is in fact illegal, but the vast majority of the time nobody gives a fuck. Close enough?

Close enough, and you touched on the one thing that does matter. $$$

In a billion dollar industry, wolf + lamb releasing some edits in underground dance music avenues register almost nothing on the radar. Neither do most other dance music tracks that we like. Nor have white label vinyls for years and years. That is the point here.

People can get their panties in a bunch over technical legality or they can look at the reality of the situation and take it for what it is.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

quote:

Originally posted by woscar Fucking hell Max, just let it go. Don't know why you care so much, really. Clovis, are you sure the MGMT samples weren't cleared? I could be wrong, but I think they mentioned on the label showcase podcast that the MGMT guys lived next door or on the same street as them and they had no problem with it. Sure, it wasn't a formal clearing per se, but at least there was some sort of verbal agreement that they were cool with the whole thing.

I'm not sure, no, but as far as I know they were not.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

woah woah woah guys sorry if I am coming off as bitter or stuck on a point here, I'm just trying to point out the legal difficulties in doing what W+L are doing and want to respectfully present my position. no need to get all huffy here, I have the utmost respect for you guys (clovis, woscar, bas) regardless of your position on this issue.

I agree beatport sales do not really take a huge chunk out the original artist's revenues, and making a cheeky edit and releasing it for $2.49 isn't nearly as damaging as pirating an entire label's discography, but I still think that most DJs and producers who have been around for some time will agree that doing a re-edit for private use is one thing, and doing a re-edit then calling it your own and releasing it for public consumption is another. I think my main problem with it is the labelling, If its a re-edit, call it a fucking re-edit! if its a bootleg, call it a fucking bootleg. You didn't produce the vocal, so why slap your name on the artist field and pretend you did? No ones gonna buy the track if its just got your cheeky drum loops and synth work, the vocal gives the edit its value.

Bottom line is if you're the original artist of a production, the samples should be unrecognizably fucked with and/or copyright free, otherwise its a remix!

___________________
-> mixes & more @ maxwelldub.net : .
-> professional analog mastering @ deliverance-mastering.com : .

"A studio environment is there to be exploited. I don't really hold with these 'all live on 2 decks mixes'. If you want that, go to the gig." - Ben Watt

quote:

Originally posted by Max Thomson Bottom line is if you're the original artist of a production, the samples should be unrecognizably fucked with and/or copyright free, otherwise its a remix!

I'm glad a lot of people don't agree because half of my music collection would likely be gone.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

ok i could've phrased that better, we're not talking a couple little snippets or a sample or two here and there, we're talking the entire vocal...

___________________
-> mixes & more @ maxwelldub.net : .
-> professional analog mastering @ deliverance-mastering.com : .

"A studio environment is there to be exploited. I don't really hold with these 'all live on 2 decks mixes'. If you want that, go to the gig." - Ben Watt

Max, they're not "calling it their own" because they want to steal any credit. Pretty much ALL bootlegs/edits are sold this way in order for them to stay below the radar as Clovis mentioned.

___________________

My Set Archive - MY BLOG

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis This has been and always will be a massive grey area in the music business.

It isn't a grey area at all. Sampling without paying royalties is illegal, black and white. There are two main reasons why so many uncleared samples escape:

1. The sampled artist/label simply doesn't realise it's happened.
2. The sampler often isn't rich enough to be worth sueing.

___________________
Mixes:
> Maximum Elevation [Progressive House]
> DI.FM 26th Anniversary Guest Mix [Progressive House]
> Live @ Dance:Love:Hub London, 11.10.2025
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24

Like these sets? Come see me play live at Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J It isn't a grey area at all. Sampling without paying royalties is illegal, black and white.

It might not be, on paper, in a court of law, but it is in reality. Both because of:

quote:

There are two main reasons why so many uncleared samples escape: 1. The sampled artist/label simply doesn't realise it's happened. 2. The sampler often isn't rich enough to be worth sueing.

...and because defining a "sample" can be very difficult. Musically, the area is very gray. The decision on where to draw the line is up for debate. I think thats a good thing.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Seplling don't demonstrate intelligence and educatoin - knowing does.

Who cares...

___________________
"So when I'm not high on cocaine, I will sit in front of this computer 'till the cows come home and continue ranting and raving about artists who are actually living out their dream... Because I never will."

www.Soundcloud.com/NotRealNick