Tag Archive for 'copyright'

SAMPLING MYTHS BUSTED OR HOW TO SUCCEED AT HIP HOP WITHOUT ENDING UP IN COURT

Published by BethanyLeavey on June 16, 2009 in Artist News. 3 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

At OurStage, the Hip Hop, Alternative Hip Hop, and Rap/Gangsta Rap Channels are chock full of talent so there is nothing sadder than removing a great song because an artist used an unlicensed sample. Copyright law is confusing, and the laws concerning sampling are changing all the time. Hopefully, this post will clear the air so that our artists can keep on making great music without ending up on the wrong side of the law.

Myth #1: Artist Permission = Legal Coverage

Many people believe if an artist grants permission to use a sample of their music then all the legal bases are covered. This is half right. In most cases, you do need to get permission from the song’s copyright owner. However, you also need to get permission to sample from whoever owns the actual sound recording. Usually this is the artist’s record label. There have been cases where artists have only needed permission from the owner of the sound recording copyright and not the owner of the song’s copyright (Newton vs. Diamond), but it is best to cover your bases and get permission from both.

Myths #2: The Five Second Rule

According to an industry urban legend, if you sample a small enough portion of a song — some say 5 seconds, some say 3 seconds — you don’t have to get permission from the sound recording copyright owner or the song copyright owner.  The truth is, there is no magic number and this is still very much a gray area. In 2004, a Cincinnati court ruled that rap group NWA were guilty of copyright infringement by sampling a two second guitar riff from the 1975 George Clinton song “Get Off Your Ass And Jam.” The judges stated in their ruling that getting permission from the copyright holder of a sound recording is always required for sampling, no matter how small the sample. While not all courts have followed suit in strictly enforcing copyright law, it’s better to secure the proper rights now then damages later and legal fees later.

Myth #3:  Standard Rate for Sampling

While there is a standard fee for covering songs, there is no standardized fee for sampling. The copyright and sound recording owners will decide usage fees on a case-by-case basis.  As a general rule, popular songs cost more to sample.

So what’s an aspiring producer or MC to do? Well, you may not be able to use that P-Funk sample of your dreams, but there is plenty of material out there by artists who allow and even encourage sampling of their work, no legal fees required—you just have to know where to look. Fortunately, you don’t have to look to far. The OurStage Prod./DJs/Beats Channel sponsored by PMP is full of artists who are looking for talented MCs to rap over their original beats.  OurStage is also home to artists like Arik Hayat and Rhyn who have made their music available for remixing with Creative Commons licensing. Artists who license their music with Creative Commons Attribution, Attribution Share Alike, Attribution Non-Commercial and Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike licenses have already granted you permission to remix and build upon their work.

Another great resource for remix ready material is ccmixter.org. ccMixter hosts samples, acapellas and instrumentals licensed under remix friendly Creative Commons licenses, as well as remixes that were created using the material posted on the site.  Freemusicarchive.org takes a slightly different approach, offering a collection of Creative Commons licensed music created by independent radio stations

Before you start mixing, remember that a Creative Commons license means, “some rights reserved,” not “no rights reserved.” Make sure you read the license for each song or sample carefully, as each Creative Commons license is a little different.  Also, think about whether your music will be for commercial or non-commercial use, as some Creative Commons licensed music is available for both while other music is available for non-commercial music only. If you are posting a song on your Website to show off your skills, then it is a non-commercial use.  But, if you are selling your songs on iTunes, then it is a commercial use.  There is a search feature on the Creative Commons Website that can help you to find audio based on whether it is for commercial or non-commercial use.

For more info about Creative Commons, visit their Website here or read last weeks Creative Commons OurStage Blog post here.

GETTING CREATIVE WITH CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSING

Published by BethanyLeavey on June 9, 2009 in Artist News. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

The RIAA has a beef with copyright infringement. Anyone who reads the paper and sees the headlines knows no one is safe from the RIAA’s wrath; not your average college co-ed, not even your own grandmother. So before you download some of your favorite tunes on the sly, think about what copyright means. With a copyright, all rights are reserved for the copyright holder because the copyright protects the creator’s exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, publish, perform, sell and adapt their work for a certain period of time. So, the college co-ed who makes a copy of a Metallica CD without Metallica’s permission is violating the band’s copyright. And your grandmother, who retired from teaching to write Harry Potter fan fiction, is violating J.K Rowling’s copyright.

Now consider what happens if the copyright holder doesn’t mind, or even encourages, the reproduction, distribution or adaption their work? What if an artist finds copyright protection too restrictive? What if they only want some rights reserved? This is where Creative Commons steps in.

Founded in 2001, Creative Commons provides free, downloadable licenses for creative works that allow copyright holders to give up some of their exclusive rights to the public. These licenses also make clear to potential users what these works can and cannot be used for and under what conditions they can be used. This video from the Creative Commons Website gives a great overview of why Creative Commons was founded, and the benefits of creating and using works with Creative Commons licenses.

Courtesy of creativecommons.org

Creative Commons offers six standard licenses to choose from:

Attribution – This license allows users to share, adapt or remix any work in any way — commercially or non-commercially — as long as they credit the creator.

Attribution Share Alike – Like “Attribution,” this license allows users to adapt and remix any work. However, in addition to crediting the creator, future users of the work must also license any new creations based on the original under the same license used by the creator.

Attribution No Derivatives – This license allows for commercial and non-commercial distribution of any work, as long as no further changes are made to the work and the creator gets credit.

Attribution Non-Commercial – A license allowing users to remix and build upon any non-commercial work. Any works based on the original must also be non- commercial and acknowledge the creator.

Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike – Similar to “Attribution Share Alike, ” this license allows users to remix, download, redistribute and build any non-commercial work. Users must credit the creator, and any new works based on the original must be licensed in the same way.

Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives – This license allows users to download and share any work. They must credit the creator and agree not to alter the work in any way or use the work for commercial purposes.

Licensing music through Creative Commons is a great way to engage current fans and create new ones. Fans no longer have to worry about ending up in court over sharing their favorite artist’s music: the Creative Commons Attribution license tells them that the artist permits and encourages sharing.  Music buffs can also get involved in the creative process by creating remixes and getting feedback from other listeners and, sometimes, the original artists themselves. The most high profile artist so far to use Creative Commons licensing to this affect is Trent Reznor. In 2008, Reznor released the Nine Inch Nails album Ghosts I-IV under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license, allowing his fans to download the full multi-track recording of the album and to post their remixes in the online community remix.nin.com. With a traditional copyright license, the thousands of fans who participate in the remix community would need to contact Reznor individually to get his permission for each remix they intend to make.  In addition, each remixer would also need to get Reznor’s permission to post their remixes online for download.  The Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license lets NIN fans know they already have Reznor’s permission to share his music with their friends, to create new works based on his music and to share those as well.

Copyright infrignment is like stealing. But why steal when you can share? Over 150 million works have been licensed through Creative Commons since the organization’s creation.  A Creative Commons license makes it easy to collaborate and share your ideas with people from all over the world, all on your own terms.

For more info about Creative Commons licensing, click here.
For music, photos, books and other works licensed under Creative Commons licenses, click here.