10-09-2004 01:35									#121
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Never your argument? It was your first friggan post in this thread.

Samping itself is not creative. Just like hitting COPY and then PASTE on your computer is not original or creative.

You're taking something and copying it.

When you're duplicating something, you cannot be creative.

If you do something like rap overtop of it, the rap may be "creative", but the sampling of the original is not...someone else created that (hence the term 'creative').

	10-09-2004 01:37									#122
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara God, molly, you are such a b!tch at times.

To each, their just deserts.


Here's a relatively early example of oneof those badass plagiarist rap artists, ripping off other people's work:

'Taverner's Western Wynde Mass is one of the great English choral works of the 16th century and here its various sections were interspersed with shorter modern items, affording a running contrast of style and sound. '

http://www.clare.cam.ac.uk/life/choir/recent.html


'The 1995 celebrations of British music have ranged far and wide: from Purcell to Tippett, from Taverner to Britten. Many claims have been made for these composers, yet so many of them should by rights have applied to Taverner alone. 'The first great English composer' has been used as a banner to describe Purcell, yet it was Taverner who was the first English composer of sufficient breadth and scope to establish an identifiable school of composition in his native land. Where Purcell has been described as the 'leading composer in Europe of his time', the same could be said with equal force of Taverner, for there was little in the immediate post-Josquin generation to rival him. Furthermore 1995 is doubly relevant to Taverner, who died in 1545 and was born in the mid-1490s, possibly in 1495.

Originally in a spirit of wanting to flatter Taverner by copying him, composers of every generation up to that of Purcell, and including Purcell himself, tested their contrapuntal techniques by basing music on the 'In nomine' section of the Benedictus of Taverner's Missa Gloria Tibi Trinitas.

Less well established is that his compositional method, for example in setting chant or developing themes, continued to be used throughout the remainder of the 16th century.

To give one example, Robert White transferred Taverner's scoring and texture from the Credo of the Missa Gloria Tibi Trinitas at 'Et incarnatus est' wholesale to the 'Sicut locutus est' section in his own six-voice Magnificat (2).

Arguably the most poignant example of Taverner's influence on his successors came from his 'Western Wind Mass'.


Perhaps he hoped that by choosing a secular tune on which to base a Mass setting (the first time such a thing had been done in English music) he would establish a series to go alongside the great European ones of L'homme armé or Mille regretz. '

http://www.gimell.com/Database/Rele...s/995notes.html


'O Western Wynd' is a secular song, of anonymous attribution.

Perhaps Taverner should not have used it as a
basis for his great mass, and instead waited until such time as a more medicore but more ah, obvious, idea entered his head.

	10-09-2004 01:38									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

As a sidenote, Molly, please use your massive cranium to figure out how to improve the readability of your posts. Perhaps make use of the [ quote ] tag, or follow proper grammar rules to differenciate between your work and the work you're "sampling".

	10-09-2004 01:39									#124
	Inflate your Upload Space

I agree completely with AS and Snapcase.

The people in this thread who are arguing otherwise are the people that have NO MUSICAL TASTE WHATSOEVER. The argument is being made by people that have never listened to more than what MTV and the radio have spoon fed them. To be fair, if all I ever got of music was MTV, I'd hate rap too. The example of Ice Ice Baby has been brought up 5 or 6 times. Of course that song sucks, but it's one freakin' song that you guys seem to be basing an entire argument around.

Samples don't simply consist of just a chunk of someone else's song. They don't even have to be music to begin with, yet great things can still be created. Take the album Deltron 3030 (Del the Funky Homosapien, Dan the Automator, Kid Koala). Automator manages to sample sci-fi sound bits from everywhere, even SMAC. The result is an album that sounds unlike any soundbit that may have been used in its production, yet wouldn't be half the album it is w/o them. Should they have to pay for every single tiny thing they used (even a speech clip from a video game) even though their creation was completely original and in no way steals or detracts from anything they sampled? Of course not, unless you don't want good music like this to be made anymore.

	10-09-2004 01:41									#125
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Asher And if you've read and actually comprehended anything in this thread, you'd realize that was never my argument.

quote: Sampling, by definition, is not creative...

	10-09-2004 01:42									#126
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Automator manages to sample sci-fi sound bits from everywhere, even SMAC. The result is an album that sounds unlike any soundbit that may have been used in its production, yet wouldn't be half the album it is w/o them. Should they have to pay for every single tiny thing they used (even a speech clip from a video game) even though their creation was completely original and in no way steals or detracts from anything they sampled? Of course not, unless you don't want good music like this to be made anymore.

The SMAC soundbits aren't being sold on their own as art, and therefore would likely not be affected by this ruling.

However, if Vanilla Ice stole the riff from Queen/Bowie, he'd be forced to pay royalties for the riff. Just like The Verve had to pay the Rolling Stones for the riff in Bittersweet Symphony...

The people who are using "musical taste" to justify their opinion in a legal argument are laughably stupid, at best.

	10-09-2004 01:45									#127
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Sampling, by definition, is not creative...

Are you reading what you're posting in context?

Molly's post was about how "sampling" has been going on for ages. It doesn't matter. It's not my argument.

He has not proven that copying someone else's work is creative, nor can anyone prove that. Sampling is, by definition, copying it.

Doing something with the copied work may be creative, but sampling -- by definition -- is not.

Can we get some more stupidity in this thread, please? It's starting to get incredibly amusing. I've never seen people call copying creative before.

You guys must've had the best defenses for cheating in school.

	10-09-2004 01:45									#128
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Asher, perhaps I can relate the musical concept to something you can understand.

In web design, everything you see today was based upon someone else's code or design. This is a fact that every web designer knows. If you are looking to create your own website, the first thing you do is look at how others did it. You want to add so cool effect or scripting. Look at how others did it. It's really easy to just hit View -> Source.

Let's say you've finished your site and it looks great. Is it bullshit that you've borrowed code from another site to help create rollover images for your buttons? According to you, the whole creative process that went into making this new site is now irrelevent because you copied, pasted, and modified one little thing.

	10-09-2004 01:46									#129
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Asher As a sidenote, Molly, please use your massive cranium to figure out how to improve the readability of your posts. Perhaps make use of the [ quote ] tag, or follow proper grammar rules to differenciate between your work and the work you're "sampling".

When lecturing someone on the proper use of English, try to make sure your spelling is correct.


Also, please note the consistent use of paragraphs in my previous post.

I believe none of the works I quoted run on into any original work of mine.

Oh, and juvenile insults aren't a substitute for coherent arguments, no matter what might be current practice in your 'social' circle- or should that be dot?.

And no matter how hard you try,and you're 'obviously' trying very hard (or obviously very trying? either will do)
you can't patronize me, no matter how much effort or sarcasm you put into it.

3/10 for effort though.

	10-09-2004 01:48									#130
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by BustaMike Asher, perhaps I can relate the musical concept to something you can understand. In web design, everything you see today was based upon someone else's code or design. This is a fact that every web designer knows. If you are looking to create your own website, the first thing you do is look at how others did it. You want to add so cool effect or scripting. Look at how others did it. It's really easy to just hit View -> Source. Let's say you've finished your site and it looks great. Is it bullshit that you've borrowed code from another site to help create rollover images for your buttons? According to you, the whole creative process that went into making this new site is now irrelevent because you copied, pasted, and modified one little thing.

If I went and stole the most distinctive part of a website wholesale -- let's say the Hotmail logo and layout -- then that is absolutely theft.

The problem is too many talentless f*cks are profiting off of someone else's work. Vanilla Ice should have never made a dime off of Ice, Ice Baby, and Puff Daddy should be sleeping on the street.

	10-09-2004 01:49									#131
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom When lecturing someone on the proper use of English, try to make sure your spelling is correct.

I was lecturing you to make your posts more readable -- one of the solutions is to use correct formatting. My posts are fairly readable, even with the odd typo...

Again, you seem completely oblivious to what's actually being said here.

quote: Also, please note the consistent use of paragraphs in my previous post. I believe none of the works I quoted run on into any original work of mine.

As an artsy intellectual, surely you know that when you're not block-quoting something, for every paragraph that continues a quote, you preface it with a quotation mark. You also make inconsistent use of a single and double quotation marks. The main quotation, or outer quotation, is a double. The inner quotation is a single.

For example: "I had a chicken 'burger' for lunch."

	10-09-2004 01:51									#132
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Asher If I went and stole the most distinctive part of a website wholesale -- let's say the Hotmail logo and layout -- then that is absolutely theft. The problem is too many talentless f*cks are profiting off of someone else's work. Vanilla Ice should have never made a dime off of Ice, Ice Baby, and Puff Daddy should be sleeping on the street.

Now see, this is the root of your problem. Sampling does not have to involve the most distinctive part of another's work. In AS's original example, the sample was 3 notes from a song that were then modified to sound totally different. You keep bringing up Vanilla Ice, but that's a crappy example. Of course that idiot should have to pay for the sample, the song has the freakin' same beat and sound and everything 'cept the vocals. This is the exception, not the rule. A blanket ruling on all sampling in music is retarded as it treats all works, including the good ones, like the unoriginal crap that is Ice Ice Baby.

	10-09-2004 01:51									#133
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Asher Are you reading what you're posting in context?

Yes, you said that was never your arugment, and yet it was your very first post. I can understand you failing to understand others, but how can you fail to understand what you wrote?

Your first post, sampling isn't creative.

Later, on two seperate occasions you say, that was never my argument.

Oh, really, then please explain what your original argument means, and how it means something other than what it says.

	10-09-2004 01:54									#134
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Yes, you said that was never your arugment, and yet it was your very first post. I can understand you failing to understand others, but how can you fail to understand what you wrote? Your first post, sampling isn't creative. Later, on two seperate occasions you say, that was never my argument.

No, I did not. Please re-read and then read again what you're quoting. This is what I said was not my argument:

quote: Of course, if you were aware of anything outside of the geekspace you inhabit, then you'd realize that sampling/plagiarism/unattributed quotes/referencing has been going on since time immemorial:

Do you mind explaining to me how that quote equates to saying "sampling is creative"?

	10-09-2004 01:57									#135
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by BustaMike Now see, this is the root of your problem. Sampling does not have to involve the most distinctive part of another's work. In AS's original example, the sample was 3 notes from a song that were then modified to sound totally different. You keep bringing up Vanilla Ice, but that's a crappy example.

It's the perfect example of some idiot profiting off of someone else's work. That or ANY Puff Daddy song.

As for the other argument, how can you even prove you're sampling 3 notes? That's such a small sample (pardon the pun) to base a case on.

	10-09-2004 01:58									#136
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Albert Speer In regards to sampling not being creative... Evidence A: www.soundclick.com/bands/0/phillysouljahmusic.htm The first minute or so of the original song is on there as well as the first minute of the dj remix i described which uses the same source song yet flips the samples differently. Clearly, even with using the exact same source (and the same Jay-Z vocals for that matter too), you can come up with very different songs. the samples are recognizable yet it all sounds different and those are two distinct songs.

Ok. As I said (in about three different ways) sampling can be a creative work if there is a significant transformation from the original. If the remixes are that different (I didn't listen to them) then they are creative. My objection is to the idea that they are inherently as creative as the original just because somebody played with them in Acid.

And I'm not even going to deal with whether the result of a filter is a creative work, or a creative work on the part of the person running the program, or a creative work on the part of the coder, or blah blah blah.

	10-09-2004 02:01									#137
	Got spare money?

Vanilla Ice, Puff Daddy. You've never heard anything good so your argument has no basis (not that you'd know good music if it slapped you in the face). If the only sandwich you've ever had was moldy, of course you're going to hate sandwiches.

Example of Creative Sampling
Please not this has NOTHING to do with commercial rap, yet you may have seen this before.
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/noises.php

	10-09-2004 02:03									#138
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by BustaMike Vanilla Ice, Puff Daddy. You've never heard anything good so your argument has no basis (not that you'd know good music if it slapped you in the face). If the only sandwich you've ever had was moldy, of course you're going to hate sandwiches.

Quality or if it's "good' or not has no bearing on its legality.

You take someone else's work and incorporate it into yours.

In the intellectual properly world, this is illegal. For example, software. It's even not permitted under the most common open source license.

Can you imagine the outrage if Microsoft put some code from OS X into Windows?

Suddenly it's totally different if we're dealing with art... double-standard. It's a no-no.

	10-09-2004 02:04									#139
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Asher He has not proven that copying someone else's work is creative, nor can anyone prove that. Sampling is, by definition, copying it. Doing something with the copied work may be creative, but sampling -- by definition -- is not.

Oh dear, getting all tangled up in the tortured starnds of what passes for your logic are you?


'Perhaps he hoped that by choosing a secular tune on which to base a Mass setting (the first time such a thing had been done in English music) he would establish a series to go alongside the great European ones of L'homme armé or Mille regretz. '

(from my previous post- you probably skipped it since it didn't mention Microsoft, hockey results, or Matchbox 20- no matter)

So Taverner copies/references/plagiarises/pays homage to, the secular song 'O Western Wynd' and CREATES for the first time in English church music a mass based on such a work.

'As an artsy intellectual, surely you know that when you're not block-quoting something, for every paragraph that continues a quote, you preface it with a quotation mark.'

Asshat


I'm terribly sorry, perhaps my intent wasn't OBVIOUS enough for you- I separated the larger paragraphs in the quote to make it more readable for people with short attention spans, not used to long passages of prose and coherent arguments.

You'll note the consistency with which I use inverted commas to frame the quoted pieces, and the links which I post underneath to the websites from where the quotes are taken.

If that isn't obvious enough for you, perhaps I could put instructions in each post just for you, in bright red large letters, so your tiny pointed head won't get all sore.


I agree though, one can read your posts easily, but they're usually not worth even that small effort.

	10-09-2004 02:05									#140
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yes, well, the "legality" of the question only chaged with the most recent ruling, didn't it? Up until that moment, it was legal.

	10-09-2004 02:09									#141
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Oh dear, getting all tangled up in the tortured starnds of what passes for your logic are you? 'Perhaps he hoped that by choosing a secular tune on which to base a Mass setting (the first time such a thing had been done in English music) he would establish a series to go alongside the great European ones of L'homme armé or Mille regretz. ' (from my previous post- you probably skipped it since it didn't mention Microsoft, hockey results, or Matchbox 20- no matter) So Taverner copies/references/plagiarises/pays homage to, the secular song 'O Western Wynd' and CREATES for the first time in English church music a mass based on such a work.

Your point is what?

quote: I'm terribly sorry, perhaps my intent wasn't OBVIOUS enough for you- I separated the larger paragraphs in the quote to make it more readable for people with short attention spans, not used to long passages of prose and coherent arguments.

I should be able to glance at your post and see which is your laughable arguments or which is regurgitated bullshit. As it stands right now, your posts are a mess.

quote: You'll note the consistency with which I use inverted commas to frame the quoted pieces

No, see...it's inconsistent. You use the marks inside existing quotations. It's ambiguous -- is that the end of the quotation or the start of a quotation?

Maybe my standards are just too high, being a science guy. All I'm asking is for you to write posts that are easy to parse...

	10-09-2004 02:12									#142
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Asher Maybe my standards are just too high, being a science guy. All I'm asking is for you to write posts that are easy to parse...

Humans aren't as dumb as computers . . . or are they?

	10-09-2004 02:13									#143
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Nope... if you are using somebodies elses work to make money, you should pay the "creators "something" for it.

I don't believe this at all. The copyright statutes with regard to music are silly. You can't copy someone's tune, and you can't sample from their records, but you can put yourself forward as a carbon copy in other respects and no one bats an eyelid.

For example, how many guitarists spent the 80s ripping off Eddie Van Halen? Or bands in the 70s that ripped off Led Zeppelin?

Copyright for music is too arbitrary to make sense as a theory of intellectual property.

All such laws as this one do is stop the creation of music that people want to hear, which is funny, because copyright law was enacted to do just the opposite.

	10-09-2004 02:15									#144
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Yes, you said that was never your arugment, and yet it was your very first post. I can understand you failing to understand others, but how can you fail to understand what you wrote? Your first post, sampling isn't creative. Later, on two seperate occasions you say, that was never my argument. Oh, really, then please explain what your original argument means, and how it means something other than what it says.

Same old story...

	10-09-2004 02:17									#145
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Can you imagine the outrage if Microsoft put some code from OS X into Windows?

No. I can only imagine the satisfaction of Windows users.

	10-09-2004 02:19									#146
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Asher I should be able to glance at your post and see which is your laughable arguments or which is regurgitated bullshit. No, see...it's inconsistent. You use the marks inside existing quotations. It's ambiguous -- is that the end of the quotation or the start of a quotation? Maybe my standards are just too high, being a science guy. All I'm asking is for you to write posts that are easy to parse...

I believe the correct usage is 'which are'.

Arguments = plural, argument = singular.

In any case your intellectual limitations cannot be attributed to my writing style.


It is easy of course to spot the regurgitated bullshit in your posts.

Other than punctuation there's frequently little else.

I think also, you'll find that quotation marks used inside quotes means that someone, being quoted, is quoting someone else-
ah, but now I understand, being a science guy, perhaps you don't see that very often.


It's quite common in literature though.

	10-09-2004 02:20									#147
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Copyright for music is too arbitrary to make sense as a theory of intellectual property.

I think the problem is less that they are abitrary and more that they are slaved to the idea of requiring an objective test to prove legality when you can't test things like how much influence one guitarist has had on another.

	10-09-2004 02:33									#148
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Asher Samping itself is not creative. Just like hitting COPY and then PASTE on your computer is not original or creative. You're taking something and copying it. When you're duplicating something, you cannot be creative. If you do something like rap overtop of it, the rap may be "creative", but the sampling of the original is not...someone else created that (hence the term 'creative').

I agree.


SPec.

	10-09-2004 02:40									#149
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: I think the problem is less that they are abitrary and more that they are slaved to the idea of requiring an objective test to prove legality when you can't test things like how much influence one guitarist has had on another.

Anyone who cares about rock guitar can hear a Van Halen clone right off the bat.

But the pro intellectual property people have just shown that they don't understand the notion. There is no moral phenomenon called "intellectual property" which someone gains rights to by creating it. That is not how intellectual property works in our society. The whole point of copyright from its inception was solely to promote the creation of things people wanted by providing a financial incentive to do so.

Every US Supreme court decision on the matter of copyright has upheld this utilitarian view of copyright.

The only real question about sampling is not "did he steal my notes?", but "is sampling negatively effecting the production of music that people want to hear?"

The anti-samplers need to prove that less people are writing music because of sampling to have any case at all. Either that, or at least that sampling is having a negative effect on the sales of the original. It seems to me that P Diddy had no effect on sales of The Police: Greatest Hits since I doubt anyone would buy one as a substitute for the other.

Does sampling mean that less work people want to hear is being made?

No. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case, samplers are producing lots of music that people want to hear. Perhaps not all of it is much good, but people like it.

There's also no evidence that Vanilla Ice negatively impacted sales of Queen's Greatest Hits II. Again it seems to me that this would actually increase sales of Queen records, since it would remind some people of how much they liked the original.

Sampling is most often a win win situation. The complaints are coming from people who wish to make something for nothing at the expense of listeners.

	10-09-2004 02:42									#150
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Asher Can you imagine the outrage if Microsoft put some code from OS X into Windows?

You mean like how Windows 3.0 borrowed from MacOS?