03.09.2015 Views

www.musicconnection.com

February 2013 - Music Connection

February 2013 - Music Connection

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

TIP JAR<br />

By Rob Litowitz<br />

Sampling Safety:<br />

Tips on Intellectual Property<br />

10<br />

and the Pitfalls of Sampling<br />

As an intellectual property (IP) attorney and music buff, attorney<br />

Rob Litowitz is an expert in the business of ideas,<br />

art and talent––and he’s seen artists run afoul of copyright<br />

and other IP issues in sampling. Litowitz offers the following tips<br />

on IP considerations for music sampling, and how to steer clear<br />

of problems in this staple of hip-hop and mashup culture.<br />

1 Face the Music: The Copyright Act protects musical <strong>com</strong>positions and<br />

sound recordings. It gives the copyright owner control over when, where,<br />

how and by whom their works can be copied and performed publicly. You<br />

can’t copy or perform someone else’s song or recording without their permission<br />

or a license. Copyright owners are entitled to reasonable <strong>com</strong>pensation<br />

when their works are sampled.<br />

2 Size Doesn’t Matter: Copyright doesn’t just protect the whole song or<br />

the entire recording. Taking fragments, snippets or parts of a recording can<br />

infringe copyrights just like copying the whole thing. Even extracting a guitar<br />

riff, drum beat or hook can violate copyright.<br />

3 Double Trouble: Making things more <strong>com</strong>plicated, would-be samplers<br />

have to contend with two separate copyrights––one in the song <strong>com</strong>position<br />

itself (covering music and lyrics) and another distinct copyright in the recording.<br />

So to safely and legally sample a portion of a prior recording requires<br />

permission from both copyright owners, usually a publishing <strong>com</strong>pany (<strong>com</strong>position)<br />

and record label (sound recording).<br />

4 Consider the Source: Licensing fees vary, depending on how much of<br />

the prior work you intend to use and who you want to sample. Sampling less<br />

than a second will cost less than sampling an extended passage of several<br />

bars. You’ll pay a steeper price to sample Led Zeppelin than an obscure<br />

blues man from Mississippi.<br />

5 Pay to Play: Recording licenses (covering the copyright in the recording)<br />

<strong>com</strong>e in two basic forms: flat fee or royalty. Flat fees can range from<br />

as little as $250 to $10,000 to sample an iconic song from a major artist.<br />

Royalties typically range between half a cent and three cents for every copy<br />

of every track sold. Musical <strong>com</strong>position licenses (covering the copyright in<br />

the song) customarily give that copyright holder a percentage ownership in<br />

the new work’s musical <strong>com</strong>position copyright and usually an advance on<br />

the expected publishing in<strong>com</strong>e.<br />

6 Not All is “Fair” in Love and Sampling: What if you sample, don’t<br />

want the expense and hassle of licensing, and are willing to risk being sued?<br />

There are two possible defenses––fair use and de minimis use. “Fair use”<br />

is based on the idea that some copying serves useful social purpose––such<br />

as education, criticism or <strong>com</strong>mentary. But the <strong>com</strong>mercial use of a sample<br />

likely wouldn’t qualify unless it’s part of a parody or satire. The de minimis<br />

doctrine might apply to a sample that is so short, and fleeting, that it can<br />

be considered trivial. But the line between “trivial” use and infringement is<br />

elusive and possibly non-existent. Some courts don’t recognize that line at<br />

all, finding any use, however minor, to be an infringement. So with sampling,<br />

it’s “mimicus emptor”––copier beware.<br />

7 The Myth of the “Four Note Rule”: There’s an urban legend known<br />

as the “four note rule.” According to this lore, four notes or less can be<br />

sampled for free. But copyright law contains no “four note” exception to infringement.<br />

Link Wray’s guitar riff from “Rumble” has just three notes. But<br />

they are among the most iconic––and valuable––notes in the rock canon.<br />

Sampling even that short fragment would likely spell big trouble.<br />

8 Beware the Fine Print: If you have a record deal with a label, be especially<br />

cautious about sampling. The standard terms of most record contracts<br />

There’s an<br />

urban legend<br />

known as the<br />

‘four note<br />

rule’....<br />

“<br />

“<br />

contain promises by you, the artist, that everything you deliver to the label<br />

is an original work. These “warranties” or “representations” are coupled with<br />

“indemnifications” that make you responsible for footing the legal bill for infringement<br />

suits. So if sampling without obtaining permission and licenses<br />

leads to infringement lawsuits, the pocket that may be emptied could be<br />

yours. You could also breach––and lose––your record contract. Mimicus<br />

Emptor indeed.<br />

9 Sampling and the Damage Done: Illegal sampling can carry stiff<br />

penalties. An aggrieved victim of sampling can choose between two forms<br />

of money damages: statutory damages or actual damages. Statutory damages<br />

are fines established by law and imposed by the court. They can range<br />

from $750 - $30,000 for each single act of infringement. If the infringement<br />

is found to be willful, the penalties can skyrocket to $150,000 per infringement.<br />

So if you sample fragments from multiple recordings without getting a<br />

license or clearance, statutory damages can be<strong>com</strong>e steep. The copyright<br />

owner can elect to forego statutory damages in favor of recovering the infringer’s<br />

profits, which also can be considerable if the new, infringing song<br />

hits it big. And adding still more pain, the court likely will block all future sales<br />

and can order the destruction of all existing copies.<br />

10 The Girl Talk Paradox: If you choose to ignore these tips, is trouble<br />

sure to follow? Not if you’re Greg Gillis, better known by his stage name “Girl<br />

Talk.” Gillis blends dozens of songs to create mesmerizing works. But Girl<br />

Talk operates without the safety net of copyright licenses. Girl Talk would<br />

seem to be America’s Most Wanted Infringer. Yet he has never been sued.<br />

Some think the recording industry fears that a court might validate the “Fair<br />

Use” defense, threatening their entire business model. So for Gillis the adage<br />

may be true, sometimes the best defense is a good offense. But for<br />

most artists, especially one’s not willing to risk their livelihoods, the lesson<br />

from the Girl Talk Paradox is this—don’t try this at home.<br />

miniBIO: Rob Litowitz is a partner at Finnegan, one of the world’s largest IP law<br />

firms. Rob has touched many aspects of the music industry, from representing<br />

musicians and radio personalities, to founding a record label, to managing<br />

artists and promoting concerts. Music Connection recognized him as one of “50<br />

Innovators, Iconoclasts, Groundbreakers, and Guiding Lights of 2008.” To read<br />

Litowitz’s thoughts on the intersection of IP law, media and entertainment, visit his<br />

blog at http://softrightsblog.<strong>com</strong>.<br />

78 February 2013 <strong>www</strong>.<strong>musicconnection</strong>.<strong>com</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!