Nu Audio Science wrote:Single cycles are all copyright free to be honest
They fall within the 1.6 second sample legislation
OK if you were to dump cycles from a synth and use those you are on very shakey ground because that isn't recording
Nu Audio Science wrote:Yes samples of less than 1.6 seconds that contain no melody or driving influence to any given piece of music they where taken from are fully legal to use
Nu Audio Science wrote:OK fine i'm making it all up hahahahaha
I have been using samples a very very long time and i have actually been involved in a sample copyright case and a couple of other copyright legislations too
But hey it must be an urban myth
the Sixth Circuit has held that the de minimis defense is not available for the sampling of sound recordings because of their intrinsic value in saving the sampler time and costs in hiring musicians to perform the music however short.
Kevin S. Brady, Esq.
Attorney at Law - Practicing in Intellectual Property and Technology Law
There are many misconceptions surrounding copyright and related technology and Internet law issues. It's often difficult to separate fact from fallacy. While it is not the goal of this article to provide a comprehensive discussion on this area of law, it is my hope that this article will help put to rest some of the common myths, fallacies and urban legends.
It's OK to sample a small piece of someone's sound recording, as such a small amount is sure to be fair use.
Fact: Unlike the case of musical compositions, there is no "de minimus" exception in the case of sound recordings. Thus, the taking of even a tiny snippet of a recording can be considered infringement. If you want to sample someone else's sound recording, obtain the proper permission (read: a license) first.
Nu Audio Science wrote:Oh yes Wikipedia is just the pinnacle of honesty and factuality isn't it hahahahahahahaha
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ... ruled that the sampling was in violation of copyright law. Their argument was that with a sound recording, an owner of the copyright on a work had exclusive right to duplicate the work. Under this interpretation of the copyright law, usage of any section of a work, regardless of length, would be in violation of copyright unless the copyright owner gave permission. In its decision, the court wrote: "Get a license or do not sample. We do not see this as stifling creativity in any significant way." This decision effectively eliminates the de minimis doctrine for recorded music in the Sixth Circuit, and has affected industry practice.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest