Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Wow, she really looked around for useful chunks! ;-)) I found the article interesting but I can't say I like it. Journalism that focuses on negative views of creator's activities is just a sad and pathetic phenomenon. It's all on the table, everyone should be able to simply listen and judge by themselves instead of letting knitty-picky lawyers destroy art. But it hasn't just been Madonna "stealing": I remember producer William Orbit was called in for Madonna's Ray of Light album in the nineties and since I've always been an admire of his electronic production style (bold and musical at the same time, rough with good taste) I looked forward that album. Guess my surprise when it was released and most of its music was Orbits old instrumental solo albums (the Strange Cargo series). Obviously he "pushed" his content into a second round instead of writing new material with Madonna (have no clue why this happened or if they tried to write new material first and he finally through in his old stuff just to "secure the gig"). Same old instrumental Orbit albums also turn up as background music for "songs with Beth Orton" (although Beth had guest appeared on some of his early recordings). I personally don't mind that though, IMO it's always interesting to experience the same music backing different vocalists. Kind of the same vibe as remix work. BTW I heard Madonna were a bit annoyed with Orbit because the finalizing of the album "took too long time", but when listening to that album it all makes sense because it really sounds good in a way that justifies retroactive degradation of Orbit's own instrumental albums as "pre production" ;-)) Greetings from Sweden Per Boysen www.perboysen.com http://www.youtube.com/perboysen On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Anders Bergdahl <anders_e_bergdahl@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I really like that Madonna link.. for me it seems like Madonna is an > expert > at finding the right inspiration, taking, slightly changing it and making > something bigger from it. > Is that not what we all do?? we hear a cool lick or looping technique and > "steal" it and use it in our own music.. > Copyright is sort of strange.. if a steal a part of a Scofield solo and > record it over the same changes with a backing that tries to copy the > orginal and a guitar tone that tries to copy Scofield it is OK. BUT if i > sample those, say 5 seconds, and use them in completely different > context it > is not legal. > Remix should be as legal as stealing a part of a melody and re-recording > it.. > in sweden this is now a official religion http://kopimistsamfundet.org/ > Copy and paste is holy.. remix is even holier.. kind of .. interesting at > least.. > > So it is my religious right to remix... (and by using CC license we allow > remixing.. .) > > Anders > > ________________________________ > Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:03:04 +0200 > Subject: Re: Copyrighting Improvised Music > From: kollegavalmentaja@gmail.com > To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com > > This shows exactly the reason why I chose to give my music away for free > 6 > years ago. > This way I can keep my sentences short and not mess money with my music. > My misguided trip that was 2 years long to the world of copyrighted music > was mistake, > and I regret it. From this day on, all my compositions belong to the > world, > my CC licenses today deny only the commercial distribution, but this > license > tempts me the most http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ > > It is commonly known fact in the world of electronic music, > that if the "big" producers want your work to be used under their > projects, > they take it, they pay the lawyers afterwards. > > Dont know if these things are true; > http://www.aishamusic.com/lawsuit_many_artists_madonna_stole_from.htm > > but there are many cases in the world of music in which "if your product > is > good, we take it and pay you afterwards, maybe not"-attitude is shown. > > >