Rarely are writers given distinct credit across all genres of music (there are professional song writers).

Anyhow, There are various types of re-credits. Eg. Markus Schulz - Perception. The original was Cass & Glide - Perception. From what I understand (could be wrong), Markus got their blessing to bring Justine back in and re-record the vocals and all that to fit his music better. While Cass, Glide, and Justine (or some combo of them) are the writers, Markus still gets the credit for his retake.

It's called LICENSING. If you're a big DJ, you bet your ass you're gonna license all the "samples" you used on your track or else your ass is gonna get in major trouble. The license/rights holder is the one who gives you permission, not necessarily the artist. For example, Black Hole is still putting out a lot of older Tiesto tracks. Tiesto sold his share on Black Hole so any tracks that Black Hole owned the rights to, Black Hole can do anything they want with them without having to ask Tiesto for permission.

There's been many times when artists are unable to "clear" all the samples used in their tracks, so as a result those tracks might never get an official release.

One of the most famous cases happened in 1994 when 2 Live Crew sampled Pretty Woman. 2 Live Crew asked for permission to sample the track, but Acuff-Rose Music refused to grant the band a license. Live Crew nonetheless produced and released the track and got taken to court. The court ruled that 2 Live Crew created something completely different to the original work, therefore it was considered Fair Use and were allowed to use the track without getting permission.

You can read more about it here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbe...ose_Music,_Inc.

To read more about the copyright law of 1976, you should read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976 That law defines what you can and cannot use. However, the law is very outdated, so it wouldn't surprise me if we get an updated version soon.

Another recent example was the Hardwell bootlegs & mashups he gave away a couple of weeks ago. In the bootleg pack, there were some Swedish House Mafia tracks that Hardwell never got permission for. So when he gave them away on his Faebook, SHM publicly called him out. As a result, Hardwell quickly pulled the tracks off FB.

There's a lot more to it and it gets very complex. I talked to a lawyer earlier this year and it was very overwhelming and complicated.

Hope that gives you an idea.

___________________
EDM is not a trend, it's a lifestyle. You either get it or you don't.

BTW, samples doesn't necessarily mean recognizable melodies or loops. It can be something as simple as a kick or a hat.

___________________
EDM is not a trend, it's a lifestyle. You either get it or you don't.

well said Woody.

for Loops & Tings, they had to go through a lot of licensing to be able to release it, if not, would have just been a bootleg for live sets.

this is a big reason why a lot of markus schulz' mashups never get released, perception in redlight district, remember magnetic north, lethal traversing, etc.

In that case I do find it disappointing that a lot of times the original artist does not get credit. It would be a shame if people never knew that it's a sample/remix. But I guess the same thing exists in rap music and other music.

I do feel that in dance music the "sampling" is a lot more blatant - it's the entire melody or hook or whatever. In hip hop it might just be a little break or whatnot but to take the ENTIRE chorus of spinning plates and just make a new song out of it... feels a little unoriginal.

And as a diehard Radiohead fan I will be pretty pissed if I come across some noob kid who thinks that Dash Berlin wrote that song.

you also have to be careful to distinguish the two types of copyright in music -- the writing (musical composition) copyright and the production (sound recording) copyright, which can be held by different persons/entities and therefore the permissions can be different. there is also compulsory licensing of composition copyrights (i.e., one can reproduce or cover the song without getting the permission of the copyright holder, as long as a minimum statutory fee is paid) but i'm not sure if it applies in the context you're describing.

I AM NOT A LAWYER

That said, who are you, do you care if people know who you are, and do you only write to your niche audience?

Djs and producers just wanton sample all the time and nothing happens over it. If you listen to guys like theo parrish and moodymann--guys who were heavily sample based house music at one point in their careers, I am willing to bet that they have uncleared samples, but don't quote me on that.

I heard a Kyle Hall song that used a sample, I don't think he's pooping money out the yin yang, but I don't think he cleared those samples either.

There's also a scene out there that releases disco edits on 12".

That's just from a small corner of music that probably only some "radio people" know of. Trance has more "radio people" even though it is a niche genre, but since it's a niche genre, no one will care to sue you unless you are tiesto, armin, pvd, oakie or one of those trance gods.

I want to tell you the really complicated etiquette on sampling. Some people are frauds, some people aren't. Some people are both at once.

Todd Terry was a guy known for sampling in his music. His peers {not necessarily in the house world, but some in clubland} called him out on it. Theo Parrish sampled a lot of music, some people sampled his samples, then they send the music to him and he calls them out on it. Moodymann samples and lots of people love this guy, but much of his work is sampled. Kevin Saunderson had a sample of his used on a song that was released as an original work. He later downloaded that song and gave it out for free as retaliation. Carl Craig did something similar. He made a re-edit of a bootleg that someone made using his work, then he gave it away for free.

DJ Shadow samples and is respected.

Deep Dish and Danny Howells sampled a song and released it as a white label.

Laidback Luke bootlegged a song, was asked to take it down from his annual bootleg packs.

Joris Voorn doesn't like a song because he thinks it's sampled. The artist looks at this comment and tells JV he didn't sample and calls him out because JV samples a lot too. The drama for this is complicated, read JV's faccebook because it has the full story and some of the other side's too.

Pretty sure daft punk cleared their samples, everyone likes them.

...tons of bootleg white labels are out there.

Then there's guys like Todd Edwards who seems to use samples exclusively, and NO ONE will ever deny his skill, even haters will have doubt towards their prejudice towards the sampler.

TL;DR - producers all have their own ethics on sampling, they call people frauds, but sample themselves. I think the general safe rule is that if you want to sample, do it from outside of clubland. If you sample one of your clubland peers, you're a fraud. Seems hypocritical.

Last edited by -FSP- on Oct-02-2012 at 10:57

I just assumed Loops & Tings was technically a cover (instead of a remix), and was treated as such. Since covers rarely seem to happen in EDM, people were perplexed by the whole thing.

___________________
www.soundcloud.com/jpamusic

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk At least last time you Brits got pissed off, we got punk music out of it. This time, it'll probably just end up being embers breaks

so most of these examples are covers. the thing about covers is that the process of releasing them is astronomically easier than actually clearing the rights - which many EDM songs do, but is much harder without resources and contacts. essentially you can just release a cover and deal with the details later. provided no samples from the original are used that is.

i find it a bit cheeky as well, but at the same time, it's somewhat tactical in terms of getting noticed.

here's another (shit) example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gExICIHLQIs