Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Fair use
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Music sampling === {{further|Legal issues surrounding music sampling}} Before 1991, [[sampling (music)|sampling]] in certain genres of music was accepted practice and the copyright considerations were viewed as largely irrelevant. The strict decision against rapper [[Biz Markie]]'s appropriation of a [[Gilbert O'Sullivan]] song in the case ''[[Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc.]]''<ref name="grand-upright">{{cite court |litigants=Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc. |vol=780 |reporter=F. Supp. |opinion=182 |court=S.D.N.Y. |date=1991 }}</ref> changed practices and opinions overnight. Samples now had to be licensed, as long as they rose "to a level of legally cognizable appropriation." This left the door open for the ''[[de minimis]]'' doctrine, for short or unrecognizable samples; such uses would not rise to the level of copyright infringement, because under the ''de minimis'' doctrine, "the law does not care about trifles." However, three years later, the Sixth Circuit effectively eliminated the ''de minimis'' doctrine in the ''[[Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films]]'' case, holding that artists must "get a license or do not sample".<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films |vol=383 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=390 |pinpoint=398 |court=6th Cir. |date=2004 |url=http://fsnews.findlaw.com/cases/6th/04a0297p.html |access-date=November 18, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060430072420/http://fsnews.findlaw.com/cases/6th/04a0297p.html |url-status=live }}</ref> The Court later clarified that its opinion did not apply to fair use, but between ''Grand Upright'' and ''Bridgeport'', practice had effectively shifted to eliminate unlicensed sampling.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Fair use
(section)
Add topic