[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
Re: fair use for samples
My impression was that the 2 Live Crew case had more to do with parody
being protected speech and the fair use implications of that, rather
than a broader interpretation of just what constitutes fair use. There
is some good information available at http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ for
them what's innerested.
George
"Emile Tobenfeld (a.k.a Dr. T)" wrote:
>
> At 1:02 PM -0400 4/26/00, Michael Tuminello wrote:
> >Length is not the only constraint. If a lawyer can make a case for
> >it being a major part of a song, like the hook from "satisfaction",
> >they could still sue you if you're not paying royalties. As I
> >understand it...
> >
> >best bet is to have it be not recognizable at all, whatever the length.
> >
> >MT
>
> The one who dies with the most lawyers wins(-;
>
> In the one case that reached the supreme court (the 2 Live Crew
> case), both the decision and opinion were firmly in favor of a broad
> view of fair use. Since few of us can afford lawyers for appeal
> litigation, this has not help the sampling cause anywhere near as
> much as I had hoped.
>
> Personally, I adapt the rule of thumb that if the original producer
> of the source would have a less thagtn 50% chance of catching it
> unprompted, its fair use. How folks like DJ Shadow or Richard Kirk,
> whose thing is based on using a large number of recognizable though
> obscure samples, deal with this is beyond me. (Kirk releases his own
> stuff and, presumably, takes his chances. Shadow hasn't done that
> much lately, perhaps because of this very issue.)
>
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man
> persists in adapting the world to himself. Therefore, all progress
> depends on the unreasonable man.
>
> -- George Bernard Shaw
>
> Emile Tobenfeld, Ph. D.
> Video Producer Image Processing Specialist
> Video for your HEAD! Boris FX
> http://www.foryourhead.com http://www.borisfx.com