At 08:36 PM 7/1/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>>According to Newton's attorney Alan Korn, "This decision sets a
>
>
>Alan Korn gave probono legal advice to us.. and I thought he agreed with
>our basic philosophy that artists should be able to sample as long as it
>creates new art. but here he seems to be on the other side of the
>fence.. so now i'm guessing his stance is to support the small guy (who
>in this case is being sampled).
>
>do others take a similar stance.. it's not a question of what is being
>sampled or how it is sampled.. but rather who is sampling who?+??????????????
Personally (and do I count?), it doesn't matter who is sampling. Which is
why I thought the whole thing about getting up in arms last year about the
Jaguar track being "covered" (or whatever it was) was quite silly and a tad
bit hypocritical. (Yes, I realize that was a full on cover, but still the
crux of the argument was big vs. little).
On the case above, I think the guy dug his own whole on lawyer
fees. Gambled on a big settlement and lost, now unwilling to pay his
debt. "When one digs their own hole, one must....cry wolf?"
Anyway.
That be my theorem.
Jason J. Tar
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
N© Detritus.net. Sharerights extended to all.