wrong! ascap is too protect the songs and artist. the federation illegally sampled the beat and hook and thats why they cant use it. . and the federation wishes they had a mill it is not up to corey hart. and thats why bay artists cant make it they dont know shit about the industry. a slap to the world wasted
Federation
- Thread starter Imonone
- Start date
WRONG ON ALL ACCOUNTS!!
1. ASCAP and BMI is who you register the song with when it is released commercially. They pay you for radio, film, TV etc. 4 times a year. Sometimes a Publishing co (ie Warner Chappell, EMI etc) will give you an advance on your publishing, that after they recoup, they will split your earnings for the contracted songs, most times 50/50. Essentially buying into your publishing. Hence pub deal.
So you couldn't be any more wrong really. WHOEVER owns the publishing for that song (it's prolly multiple owners) would love nothing more than that song to drop because with all the radio play/tv play it would get, it would make a ton of money.
2. So what part did the Federation "illegally sample" of the song. The beat...no Rick Rock played every sound of that. The hook.....no Marty James resang a hook with completely different words that The Fed wrote. Maybe it was the raps.......uh no.
3. Finally the Federation wouldn't have to offer Hart a million. But bet that Warner offered him a few hundred thousand racks and that, on top of the royalties for sales and the publishing.....I was estimating a million. Which is probably low.
This comes down them needing the rights to cover dudes song and HIM PERSONALLY SAYING NO. The other dude was right he prolly don't need the chips and to him he don't want his song fucked with. That's the price you pay fuckin with a cover though. Let me know when you want me to school you again :classic:
1. ASCAP and BMI is who you register the song with when it is released commercially. They pay you for radio, film, TV etc. 4 times a year. Sometimes a Publishing co (ie Warner Chappell, EMI etc) will give you an advance on your publishing, that after they recoup, they will split your earnings for the contracted songs, most times 50/50. Essentially buying into your publishing. Hence pub deal.
So you couldn't be any more wrong really. WHOEVER owns the publishing for that song (it's prolly multiple owners) would love nothing more than that song to drop because with all the radio play/tv play it would get, it would make a ton of money.
2. So what part did the Federation "illegally sample" of the song. The beat...no Rick Rock played every sound of that. The hook.....no Marty James resang a hook with completely different words that The Fed wrote. Maybe it was the raps.......uh no.
3. Finally the Federation wouldn't have to offer Hart a million. But bet that Warner offered him a few hundred thousand racks and that, on top of the royalties for sales and the publishing.....I was estimating a million. Which is probably low.
This comes down them needing the rights to cover dudes song and HIM PERSONALLY SAYING NO. The other dude was right he prolly don't need the chips and to him he don't want his song fucked with. That's the price you pay fuckin with a cover though. Let me know when you want me to school you again :classic:
nigga ric sampled the beat of the original song. and if the song resembles the original in anyway....the hook sounds too similar retard! thats why the are going through this because its copyright infringment (not publishing). you can cover a song without getting copyright permission but they didnt COVER it they redid it. So you say corey hart has the right to say yes or no? naw nigga how do you know he owns the rights to his music? you do know when people sign those little things called contracts they usually sing the rights away for atleast as long as their on the label. oh ya you know everything! so your saying that warner offered or would even offer a couple hundred racks for a hit or miss group who sold a wopping 30,000 on their only album? plus the royalties? wow you really know the industry.so if warner offered him a couple hundred racks just to clear one song .........how much do you think they spent on the album alltogether? a few mill? ha! why would they spend that much on some indie artist album? the money they spend onthe album is advancement money that has to be payed back by the artist before they can collect a cent of royalties. so please school me on what you might of heard or read.
OK well I ain't gonna call you names because it's obvious Rick didn't sample the song and that's what you whole argument is based on. The original of the song is about 15bpm faster than the Feds version bro!! NO SAMPLE!
And I know for a fact what Warner offered but you can act like you know the game if you want. If Warner thought the Feds were only gonna sell 30k on this one they wouldn't have signed them man. Major labels spend alot of money on releases and if they have a guaranteed smash you're gonna spend what it takes to clear it.
And I know for a fact what Warner offered but you can act like you know the game if you want. If Warner thought the Feds were only gonna sell 30k on this one they wouldn't have signed them man. Major labels spend alot of money on releases and if they have a guaranteed smash you're gonna spend what it takes to clear it.
my whole thing is if he didnt sample any of the song then why cant they use it? cuz he did sample it! but i guess if you speed it up it doesnt count huh? i never said they were going to sell only 30. they sold 30 or less on there self titled album. they are a risk not a for sure. so why would warner spend a few mill on the album + royalties for a group who will do less than 100 they will lose money and drop the feds. i bet the feds do maybe 60-100 this time. normally the smart thing to do is clear the song before you record it and try and put it on your album. good conversating BRO!
Sampling is the use of portions of prior recordings which are incorporated into a new composition. Sampling has become an integral part of many genres of music today. When you sample someone's song without permission, it is an instant copyright violation. It is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material owned by another. Sampling without permission violates two copyrights-the sound recording copyright (usually owned by the record company) and the copyright in the song itself (usually owned by the songwriter or the publishing company).
If you want to use a sample legally, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The copyright owner is usually a publishing company or record label. Remember that you must obtain permission from both the owner of the sound recording and the copyright owner of the underlying musical work. The fee for a license to use a sample can vary tremendously. The fee will depend on how much of the sample you intend to use (a quarter second is a minor use; five seconds, a major use), the music you intend to sample (a Madonna chorus will cost more than an obscure drum beat), and the intended use of the sample in your song (it is more costly to build your entire song around the sample than to give it only minor attention).
There are two different ways to pay for a license. First, you can pay a flat fee for the usage. A buy-out fee can range from $250 to $10,000 on a major label. Most fees fall between $1,000 and $2,000. The other way to pay for the license is a percentage of the mechanical royalty rate. The mechanical royalty rate is the amount a person pays to the copyright owner to make a mechanical reproduction (copy) of the song. A license which is a percentage of the mechanical royalty rate is generally between ½ ¢ and 3¢ per record pressed. Everything is negotiable and it is not unusual to get a license for free, if you ask.
If all of this sounds confusing, there's hope. There are businesses devoted entirely to securing and negotiating clearances for samples. These firms charge less than an entertainment attorney would charge and are generally more knowledgeable about the going rates for uses.
If you use samples without obtaining the proper clearance licenses, you have to be aware of the penalties. A copyright infringer is liable for "statutory damages" that generally run from $500 to $20,000 for a single act of copyright infringement. If the court determines there has been wilful infringement, damages can run as high as $100,000. The copyright owner can also get a court to issue an injunction forcing you to cease violating the copyright owner's rights. The court can also force you to recall all your albums and destroy them.
There is also a rumor going around that you can use four notes of any song under the "fair use" doctrine. There is no "four note" rule in the copyright law. One note from a sound recording is a copyright violation. Saturday Night Live was sued for using the jingle, "I Love New York" which is only four notes. The test for infringement is whether the sample is "substantially similar" to the original. Remember, a judge or jury is the one who determines this and these people may be much less receptive to your music than your fans. My point is you cannot rely on fair use as a defense.
Sampling can also have tremendous consequences if you have a record contract. Most record contracts have provisions called "Warranties",
"Indemnifications" and "Representations". These provisions constitute a promise that you created all the music on your album and an agreement to reimburse the label if it is sued. These same provisions are included in all contracts throughout the entertainment distribution chain. The record company has them with the artist, the distributors with the record company, the record stores with the distributors, and so on. Well, all these warranties point back at the artist who is responsible to everyone else! Therefore, if you violate someone else's copyright, you will be paying all the bills of your record company, distributor and any stores which incur expenses as a result of your infringement. This can run into serious money as you can imagine. You will also be in breach of your record contract. Read your record contract carefully before using any samples.
I just lost the link to that one, but here is the link to COVER ISSUES and this will explain cover laws pertaining to infirngment, royalties, etc:
http://www.cleverjoe.com/articles/music_copyright_law.html
Whoever owns the rights to music is the one who will get cashed out, and it doesn't matter if it is Corey Hart, Bret Hart, Jimmy hart or Lion fuckin Heart.
As far as speeding up the tempo/BPM you can speed it up all day and still get charged with infringement.
If you want to use a sample legally, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The copyright owner is usually a publishing company or record label. Remember that you must obtain permission from both the owner of the sound recording and the copyright owner of the underlying musical work. The fee for a license to use a sample can vary tremendously. The fee will depend on how much of the sample you intend to use (a quarter second is a minor use; five seconds, a major use), the music you intend to sample (a Madonna chorus will cost more than an obscure drum beat), and the intended use of the sample in your song (it is more costly to build your entire song around the sample than to give it only minor attention).
There are two different ways to pay for a license. First, you can pay a flat fee for the usage. A buy-out fee can range from $250 to $10,000 on a major label. Most fees fall between $1,000 and $2,000. The other way to pay for the license is a percentage of the mechanical royalty rate. The mechanical royalty rate is the amount a person pays to the copyright owner to make a mechanical reproduction (copy) of the song. A license which is a percentage of the mechanical royalty rate is generally between ½ ¢ and 3¢ per record pressed. Everything is negotiable and it is not unusual to get a license for free, if you ask.
If all of this sounds confusing, there's hope. There are businesses devoted entirely to securing and negotiating clearances for samples. These firms charge less than an entertainment attorney would charge and are generally more knowledgeable about the going rates for uses.
If you use samples without obtaining the proper clearance licenses, you have to be aware of the penalties. A copyright infringer is liable for "statutory damages" that generally run from $500 to $20,000 for a single act of copyright infringement. If the court determines there has been wilful infringement, damages can run as high as $100,000. The copyright owner can also get a court to issue an injunction forcing you to cease violating the copyright owner's rights. The court can also force you to recall all your albums and destroy them.
There is also a rumor going around that you can use four notes of any song under the "fair use" doctrine. There is no "four note" rule in the copyright law. One note from a sound recording is a copyright violation. Saturday Night Live was sued for using the jingle, "I Love New York" which is only four notes. The test for infringement is whether the sample is "substantially similar" to the original. Remember, a judge or jury is the one who determines this and these people may be much less receptive to your music than your fans. My point is you cannot rely on fair use as a defense.
Sampling can also have tremendous consequences if you have a record contract. Most record contracts have provisions called "Warranties",
"Indemnifications" and "Representations". These provisions constitute a promise that you created all the music on your album and an agreement to reimburse the label if it is sued. These same provisions are included in all contracts throughout the entertainment distribution chain. The record company has them with the artist, the distributors with the record company, the record stores with the distributors, and so on. Well, all these warranties point back at the artist who is responsible to everyone else! Therefore, if you violate someone else's copyright, you will be paying all the bills of your record company, distributor and any stores which incur expenses as a result of your infringement. This can run into serious money as you can imagine. You will also be in breach of your record contract. Read your record contract carefully before using any samples.
I just lost the link to that one, but here is the link to COVER ISSUES and this will explain cover laws pertaining to infirngment, royalties, etc:
http://www.cleverjoe.com/articles/music_copyright_law.html
Whoever owns the rights to music is the one who will get cashed out, and it doesn't matter if it is Corey Hart, Bret Hart, Jimmy hart or Lion fuckin Heart.
As far as speeding up the tempo/BPM you can speed it up all day and still get charged with infringement.
^^^ No one is saying that it is a sample that was taken from the ORIGINAL recording of the song, looped or whatever. However, REPLAYING the original song, which is an INTERPOLATION, still requires some form of payment as it will fall under the license for MUSICAL WORK and not under SOUND RECORDING because the original recording was not used. What I am telling YOU and ANYONE else reading this thread is that speeding up the source material and making something new around it will still fall under sampling.
BTW, Don't come back with the "You don't know the business" stuff you did with that other cat. I'm a registered member of a.s.c.a.p, b.m.i, TAXI, and I'm actually Goldies UNCLE (his mom = my oldest sister.)
BTW, Don't come back with the "You don't know the business" stuff you did with that other cat. I'm a registered member of a.s.c.a.p, b.m.i, TAXI, and I'm actually Goldies UNCLE (his mom = my oldest sister.)