Using Song Samples

[Levis]

I don't know if this is the most famous case, or if I'm just more familiar with it (for obvious reasons )

The Verve vs. The Rolling Stones

[smaller]from samplinglaw.com [/smaller]

The Verve sampled an orchestration on their song "Bittersweet Symphony" from The Rolling Stone's "The Last Time". Before the release of the album, The Verve negotiated a licensing agreement with The Rolling Stones to use the sample -- at least the composition rights to the sample. In 1997, The Verve's album "Urban Hymns" peaked at number 23 on the Billboard Charts. What ensued was a bitter (and not sweet) legal battle resulting in The Verve turning over 100% of the royalties to the Rolling Stones. The Rolling Stones argued that The Verve had violated the previous licensing agreement by using too much of the sample in their song. The Verve argued that The Rolling Stones got greedy when the song became successful. Herein lies the issue of moral rights of a samplist.

"The last thing I ever wanted was for my music to be used in a commercial. I'm still sick about it", The Verve's lead singer Richard Ashcroft said in a recent interview. So, that's exactly what Rolling Stones manager Allen Klein did. Capitalizing off the success of the song, Klein licensed The Verve's "Bittersweet Symphony" to Nike, who proceeded to run a multi-million dollar television campaign using The Verve's song over shots of its sneakers. Klein also used the song to hawk Vauxhall automobiles. Additionally, though the song was authored by The Rolling Stones, the Andrew Loog Oldham Orchestra performed the sampled recording and also filed suit upon the success of the song. (Herein lies a fine caveat to license both the recording and composition rights from whomever maintains them.) To add even more insult to injury, when "Bittersweet Symphony" was nominated for a Grammy, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards were named the nominees and not The Verve. What could be more "Bittersweet" than your song reaching the top of the charts and not being able to enjoy a cent of its success?

"It could've been worse," Ashcroft continued. "If we hadn't fought, 'Symphony' could've ended up on a cheeseburger ad and never have been taken seriously again." Yum.

-----------------------

Also from the same site:

Negativland, Coca-Cola, and Fatboy Slim

Now, that you have cheeseburgers on the brain, why not wash it down with some Coke. One of the most notorious examples of sampling irony is the Negativland/Coca-Cola connection. The California-based band Negativland, copyright infringers of the highest reverence, "illegally" sampled a 1966 religious record and calls their version of the song "Michael Jackson". Samplist Fatboy Slim decides to sample Negativland's song, licenses the Negativland version of the religious sample from SST records, and also calls the song "Michael Jackson." After Fatboy's ensuing popularity, creative advertising executives decide to license Fatboy Slim's song for a Coca-Cola television commercial. Result: Coca-Cola unwittingly engages in copyright infringement. Negativland, whose calling is to debase advertising on all levels, find their music selling soft drinks. Fatboy Slim deposits a huge check in his bank account.

Negativland writes: "The track 'Michael Jackson' from this Fatboy Slim CD ['Better Living Through Chemistry' (Astralwerks) 1998] samples from the Negativland track 'Michael Jackson' from our 1987 release 'Escape From Noise' on SST Records.

"Stupidly, Fatboy Slim went to SST Records to get permission to use this sample. SST charged him $1000, which they are keeping all for themselves, of course. Besides the fact that Fatboy could have kept his $1000 and taken the sample from us without permission and we wouldn't have cared, the Negativland sample he used was itself appropriated by us without permission from a religious flexi-disc originally issued in 1966. [in fact, a Negativland member LITERALLY stole this record from the basement of a church in Concord CA.]

The Letter U and the Numeral 2

This is probably one the best sampling stories ever. A small paragraph cannot do it justice so I urge all of you to buy the book on the subject. One of the most notable cases involving Negativland was unfortunately settled out of court by their label at the time. In 1989, the band sampled portions of the band U2's song "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" and mixed it with angry outtakes of Casey Kasem messing up an introduction of the same song whilst shouting vulgarities at his staff. Negativland and their label were sued by U2 and wanted to use the fair use exception as a defense. Unfortunately the label settled before the band's attorneys could try the defense and, subsequently, the label sued the band, causing their bankruptcy. At the time Negativland appropriated the U2 song, U2 was engaged on their global "Zoo TV" tour. The live performance was developed around the concept of media saturation and featured over fifty different televisions on stage, individually linked into different satellite feeds from around the world. Several years later, in an interview for magazine Mondo 2000, a member of Negativland asked U2's guitarist, The Edge, if fragmentary appropriation should be permitted. The Edge responded that he supports fragmentary appropriation if used in a different context of the original work. The Negativland member then asked The Edge to pay his legal bills to no avail. So, here, a band that says they favor fragmentary appropriation, a band who engages in fragmentary appropriation, sue for fragmentary appropriation and obtain a large settlement. Singer Bono even once sang in his song "The Fly", "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief." Apparently, some artists are hypocrites.

[miamisammy29]

Sampling sucks! It shows not one iota of one's musical prowess, and should not be allowed at all. The sampler is capitalizing on someone else's talent and hard work. If they wanna rip off a song, they should just play it similarly in their own style. Now, that sh*t's been done a billion times, and nobody's the wiser.

[Farin]

au contraire

if done right sampling has nothing to do with ripping off the original artist, then it has more to do with an hommage to them

and just what would eg Beck be without sampling?

and here's another positive example

[miamisammy29]

Sorry, Dude. If it really was an "homage" (as some may claim), then they wouldn't be accepting the millions of dollars they receive from sales of the ripped off songs. They’d be donating it to a charity of the sampled band’s choice. Even so, they’re using it as a way to make a name for themselves. Homage?....I think not. No...it's thievery, plain and simple. (I mean, I’m a fan of Mario Andretti, but you don’t see me going around ripping off his f***ing race cars, stencilling my name on the back and selling them as my own, do you?!) And yes, this includes Beck....whom I happen to dig...(his original stuff, anyway). That dude’s out there. I like the Verve a bit, too…

But I digress...

As I was saying, people like MC Hammer, Run-DMC, Fat B*stard Slim, and Poof Daddy-O, …the Verve, and even Beck… Do you really think you would have ever heard of these guys if they hadn’t started their careers sampling other people’s music? No way! They obviously didn’t have enough talent to write their own hit songs, so they recycled others’. Or maybe they DID have the talent! But we’ll never know, because they chose to take the p*ssy way out and rip off somebody else by dubbing their poetry over someone else’s music.

And, try all you want, but you will NEVER get me to change my stance on "sampling", which, in my opinion, is a combined effort of marginally talented musicians, unscrupulous record companies, money hungry agents, and, of course, THE DEVIL!

Thank you for listening.

[The Seeker]

Sampling IS the easy way out... I don't see it as a hommage either. If a song is a popular, successful piece of music, then using it for your own song is quite a head start on people who write a song from scratch. The sampling people's song is bound to contain at least one bit of music which is good and recognisable, or else they wouldn't sample it. And they don't have to work for that at all.

That said, I've known Bitter Sweet Symphony just as long as The Last Time, and it never occurred to me that they sound alike in any way.

[miamisammy29]

That said, I've known Bitter Sweet Symphony just as long as The Last Time, and it never occurred to me that they sound alike in any way.

Me neither. I kinda like it....so we'll let that one slide.

[edna]

I've known Bitter Sweet Symphony just as long as The Last Time, and it never occurred to me that they sound alike in any way.

I found some resemblance when I heard about it some time ago but I would have never found out by myself...

[The Seeker]

See my post in the current Top Ten thread... but that's really just Andrew Loog Oldham's version, not the Rolling Stones' one. I still don't think those two sound similar.

[Farin]

If a song is a popular, successful piece of music, then using it for your own song is quite a head start on people who write a song from scratch.

I fully agree with that!

but what if the sample is not really recognisable as coming from a famous song (as in The Verve's example)?

or, what also happens very frequently, what if the sampled song is a very obscure one?

eg, Beck's "Loser" is "built around a sample from a cover of the Dr. John song "I Walk on Gilded Splinters" by Johnny Jenkins from his album Ton-Ton Macoute"

[Ombre Vivante]

Uh, there is nothing new under the sun, kiddies. Sampling is done all the time in the music industry. The difference between good and bad sampling can be heard in Negativland's albums (that name was spawned from a Neu! song - themselves, a band that sampled heavily) versus puke daddy's crappy albums. There is simply no match between the genius of Brian Eno versus that of some r&b hack cutting and pasting music onto janet hackson's songs.

If you're really into obscure music (old Jazz and Blues LPs from the 50s and 60s), then you might even find that some of your famous Blues Rock bands have sampled and/or stolen riffs outright from their less popular comrades. I've heard led zeppelin has done this. I ferget which track and what artist, but the songs were played back-to-back... and it was the same riff. Would I say led zappelin sux? Only because jimmy is a child molester. Otherwise, the music still rocks.

POO2 should be sampled back to last century. Buncha wankers.

[Ombre Vivante]

Anyone hear "Acquiesce" by Oasis? Listen to the guitar riff at the beginning. Now, turn back to Suede's "Metal Mickey." Listen to their guitar riff. Hear something similar? I think both songs are the best of both bands

[Levis]

I have nothing against sampling either a) a very well-known piece of music or a little-known piece of music, provided credit is given where credit is due. (I don't know what the in-between case would be... hmmm)

In the first case - everyone already knows the tune, therefore the original artist's song is only gaining more popularity... or the song doesn't really 'belong' to an artist anymore given the degree to which it is known. Eg. taking a sample from the Mission Impossible or the James Bond themes. Take permission and use the tune... I'm all for it.

The second case is a bit trickier, because it is likely to end up being seen as exploitation. But I would never consider it to be the result of a lack of talent. Beck, Moby etc. are NOT untalented, and their use of samples can hardly be used to 'prove' any such thing when they have stacks of great independently created songs.

As for the Verve vs. Stones case... That tune is not even a sample! To me it's nothing more than a similar chord structure for which they already GOT the permission that wasn't even the Stones' to give! and then Mick and Keith got SONGWRITING credits? wtf? :beady:

[miamisammy29]

Are you sure it was the Stones that sued them? Or was it Allen Klein?

The Stones have had no connection to Allen Klein since 1970, except for the fact that they sued him, too. Klein has rights to all the Stones music before 1970, including "The Last Time". The Stones broke off from Klein in 1971 and started their own recording label, mainly because Klein was squeezing every last dime out of them for something he didn't really deserve. And I have a feeling he's the one doing it to the Verve, too.

As for the songwriting credits, if it was a "sampled" tune taken directly from the recording (which I'm pretty sure the Verve admitted it was), then they have no choice but to give credit to the Stones. The Verve guy should also have his name on it for the parts that weren't sampled.

But this is where the sampling argument comes in again. There have been many "artists" who have sampled the actual recorded tunes, added one drumbeat or two piano notes, and listed themselves as the only composer. Vanilla Ice immediately comes to mind....come on, somebody try to tell me that THAT was an homage and not thievery!

Once again, thank you for listening. And I have spoken on this issue for "The Last Time".

Y'all be cool. Right on!

[Levis]

I saw a snippet of a Vanilla Ice interview where he vehemently DENIED whacking Under Pressure. I could not find it on YouTube last time I looked. He was all 'no no it's not the same... Under Pressure goes ding ding ding didi ding ding, and mine goes ding ding ding didi dindin ding... see? There's that ittybitty dindin there!'

Like...

[c_s_1987]

I've had mixed opinions about sampling for a long time. I guess I think it's okay as long as the artists don't do it just for money. Which a lot of them do, of course. It's pretty much the same opinion I have with cover versions, though I'd say cover versions are a better way of paying homage to a great artist.

[Levis]

Are you sure it was the Stones that sued them? Or was it Allen Klein?

The Stones have had no connection to Allen Klein since 1970, except for the fact that they sued him, too. Klein has rights to all the Stones music before 1970, including "The Last Time". The Stones broke off from Klein in 1971 and started their own recording label, mainly because Klein was squeezing every last dime out of them for something he didn't really deserve. And I have a feeling he's the one doing it to the Verve, too.

As for the songwriting credits, if it was a "sampled" tune taken directly from the recording (which I'm pretty sure the Verve admitted it was), then they have no choice but to give credit to the Stones. The Verve guy should also have his name on it for the parts that weren't sampled.

I did know it was Allen Klein but it didn't strike me that he had done all this courtcase nonsense independently of the Stones.

Chiz... all this time I thought it was a matter of who got credit for the song, but wouldn'tcha know it'd be all about the money (for one of the parties, anyway)

[Ombre Vivante]

Oh, God... allen klein. The name makes me shudder. This is the same money-grubbing worm low-life who wouldn't officially license El Topo and The Holy Mountain for years. This guy makes yoko ono look like a saint. He's worth every one of those infamous seven words.

[Shawna]

I've always hated hearing "sampled" music. It makes me grind my mind back to when the "sampled" song was popular, and sometimes I can't even pin down what song it is, but I know I know it. It drives me bananas.

That said, anybody hear Kid Rock's new one, which "samples" two huge songs at the same time?

[Levis]

If it's sampled 'right' it credits the original authors, no?

[Shawna]

I have no idea if the original artists are credited by him. I know that the DJ on the radio station I listen to that plays it credits them, though.

[Ombre Vivante]

Nowadays, you can't be Kid Rock and not pay royalties to the owner(s) of the songs he sampled.

[Crazy Don]

Oh, God... allen klein. The name makes me shudder. This is the same money-grubbing worm low-life who wouldn't officially license El Topo and The Holy Mountain for years. This guy makes yoko ono look like a saint. He's worth every one of those infamous seven words.

Not only that, he withheld 99.9% of all songs released on the Cameo and Parkway labels onto CD's until 2005, (the exception being two Chubby Checker songs appearing on the "Moonlighting" soundtrack CD), which means that we were stuck with crappy rerecordings of Cameo-Parkway artists on compilation discs until 2005!

[Batman]

When people who don't really know much about music hear the word "sampling," they think of puff daddy and vanilla ice changing nothing about the songs they sample, which I'll admit is not artistic and pretty close to theft. People don't realize that sampling has been around since the 40's, when avant garde composers such as pierre schaefer made "musique concrete" such as this. Musique concrete is using sampling of tape loops to create dissonant musical collages of random noises. Not very fun to listen to, but important because it paved the way for future artists who use samplers to create their own music. And they DO create their own music. I mean, watch this video of mashup artist Girl Talk sampling an Elvis Costello song, and try to tell me he hasn't made it his own. There's no way the final product is still an Elvis Costello song.

Here's another good example of the artistic use of sampling: Kid Koala. He's sampled a few seconds of a trumpet solo and created something entirely new with it. Not all sampling is talentless celebrities stealing an already popular tune...most sampling is an artistic way to create music that takes a lot of skill and talent.

[TheLizard]

Whoa, it's Batman.

[Batman]

here's one of my favorite songs created by samples:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=54_7m-CVTMY

Another one of my favorites, also built on samples:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=WK3O_qZVqXk

how about that? both artistic and fun at the same time!