[rumori] The Sample Clearance Fund: A proposal
Nicola Battista [rumori] The Sample Clearance Fund: A proposal
Wed, 26 Aug 1998 00:19:53 +0200 (00904112393, 220.127.116.1180825234626.015159a0ATbox1.tin.it)
this forward is a reply from Andy Jones of Future Music/Computer Music
Magazine I just got...
>Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 16:10:09 +0000
>From: "Andy Jones" <andy.jonesATfuturenet.co.uk>
>Organization: Computer Music Magazine
>To: Nicola Battista <djbatmanATtin.it>
>Subject: Re: [rumori] The Sample Clearance Fund: A proposal
>Some thoughts on this. Sorry it's in no particular order - bit pushed at
>the moment launching a new mag.
>I researched the whole sampling issue a couple of years ago for an
>article for Future Music and tried to sweep away a few misconceptions.
>The first is that you simply have to clear EVERY sample you use when you
>release a recording in the UK (and I susopect everywhere else). There is
>no exemption for short samples (although you're bound to get away with
>microseconds!). Vocal samples and TV/film/broadcast samples are
>particularly difficult. You're dealing with several copyrights including
>those of the broadcaster and those of the actors themselves.
>In the UK the MCPS operates a kind of sample police service, or they
>used to anyway, where someone is employed to listen to just about every
>new release to check for samples. Strikes me as being an impossible
>The result is a highly complex affair where artists have to cross a
>minefiled to get material released and end up having to compromise.
>The advioce I used to give readers was to simply be creative when
>sampling. Don't lift ruddy great chunks, do exercise a certain amount of
>manipulation on the sound, create a completely different feel from the
>original song. I'm all for sampling and think it's a genuine art form.
>Listening to the likes of DJ Shadow and you realise they are breathing
>new life into these sounds and, as to whether the original artists
>should benefit is difficult to call. If the new recordings are so
>totally different then maybe not. If you're Puff Daddy then yes they
>should. But where do you draw the line? That where the complication lies
>and I don't honestly know the answer. If everything becomes public
>domain you end up thousands of cover versions. However if the situation
>remains as is, people simply become creatively knackered. Even if you
>rely on sample CDs you're often not completely 100% safe (and everyone
>else is using those samples)
>So I guess I'm for your idea, but if you're clever and creative you can
>get by. Just be carefulů
>Just read that back and it rambles somewhat, but I'm tired and have just
>had a very tough meeting. Maybe you'd like to edit it for me (so said
>Hope it helps anyway
>Andy Jones, ex editor Future Music, new editor Computer Music
Nicola (Dj Batman) Battista