Quantcast
end of the mixtape? lord finesse 10 mil lawsuit against mac miller - Page 3 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
end of the mixtape? lord finesse 10 mil lawsuit against mac miller
Old 29th January 2013 | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
knowing everybody gets on well known instrumentals to gain exposure / money...

how many of you engineers turn down mixing vox and well known instrumentals for a mixtape?
It's not my job as engineer to worry about sample clearance. They pay me to record and/or mix the song, end of story.

Chris had a very accurate response, and again, knowing a lot more of the backstory that isn't being publicized 99.9% of ya'll would have done the same **** as 'Ness, or took other less legal retaliatory steps.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #62
Lives for gear
 
TheOxmyn's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
how about this then, joey basa$$ used a lord finesse instrumental as well on his mixtape
I seen an interview w/ Joey Bada$$ & he explained how he doesn't want to use any beats that are unoriginal anymore to avoid same **** going on w/ Mac/Finesse.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #63
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 ➡️
^ that's inaccurate. The sampling song (finesses) is a NEW composition, of which he's a writer, as are "you". When the 3rd person uses the 2nd song he's using yours & finesses song, not just your sample again.
idk, you might be right. I don't sample anything so I never have to deal with these messes. But even with what you;re saying, if it weren't for Petersons sample, the Finesse guy would have no song. So if he were to sue Miller, I'd think Peterson would be the one entitled to the money, or at least most of it. And if Peterson isn't agreement with the lawsuit, I don't know how Finesse can sue, when he doesn't entirely own the song.

Whether thats not legally correct idk, but it seems like it should be imo
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #64
Moderator
 
Bender412's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse381 ➡️
idk, you might be right. I don't sample anything so I never have to deal with these messes. But even with what you;re saying, if it weren't for Petersons sample, the Finesse guy would have no song. So if he were to sue Miller, I'd think Peterson would be the one entitled to the money, or at least most of it. And if Peterson isn't agreement with the lawsuit, I don't know how Finesse can sue, when he doesn't entirely own the song.

Whether its not legally correct idk, but it seems like it should be imo
With all due respect, I don't think you're very familiar with how copyright works, and the differences between "sound recordings" and "songs (publishing)." Go back and glance at mine, and especially Chris Carter's post.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #65
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse381 ➡️
idk, you might be right. I don't sample anything so I never have to deal with these messes.
Actually, they are absolutely right. I'd take if from the people who do deal with "these messes", professionally. And like the other guy said, go re-read Chris Carter's post if you're unclear on the nuances.

It astounds me how people form such solid opinions on things that they have no real experience with. As a guy who's worked in A&R and licensing, 80% of the opinions expressed in this thread are both silly and scary.
Old 30th January 2013
  #66
Lives for gear
 
drethe5th's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Downer ➡️
THIS is really sad man a RAP artist sueing because somebody used his beat on a mixtape... That makes me lose a lot of respect for an mc of the sample culture... REALLY WACK
Agree.
I know he didnt clear every sample on his music before recording it. The law ist copyright, only when released. The law states, as soon as you load it in your sampler, youve commited infringment unless you had permission to do so, before hand. So Finesse is just as guilty as anyone. He shouldve taken it as a compliment.

Posted via mobile device.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiborg ➡️
Actually, they are absolutely right. I'd take if from the people who do deal with "these messes", professionally. And like the other guy said, go re-read Chris Carter's post if you're unclear on the nuances.

It astounds me how people form such solid opinions on things that they have no real experience with. As a guy who's worked in A&R and licensing, 80% of the opinions expressed in this thread are both silly and scary.
I don't know who you are or any of these ppl are in this thread, or if you/they know anymore than I do. I'm just giving my opinion on how I think it should be. If you're astounded by someone giving their opinion on a topic in a forum, then you shouldn't be reading forums.

Being that you work in licensing, I understand if you're mostly concerned with money as the bottom line, and therefore may agree with this practice of suing in this manner. But as someone who actually composes original music, I don't agree with it, and thats my opinion. If I gave someone permission to sample my music, I wouldn;t be ok with them suing someone else for using the sample, when I own the sample. I don't care if he added some little drum machine beat over it, its my music being used in a lawsuit w/o my compliance. In my opinion, thats not right.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #68
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse381 ➡️
If I gave someone permission to sample my music, I wouldn;t be ok with them suing someone else for using the sample, when I own the sample.
I don't think you're understanding the framework here. More than likely, the original composers didn't give permission for their work to be sampled- they were paid as co-writers on the resulting "new work". Read Chris Carter's post again. It's not a matter of opinion here... You're not clear on the facts, and are basing your opinion on the way that thing's aren't.

And btw, it's not a background in licensing that makes me feel this way... It's actually my own history as a composer of original music that makes me think that composers (i.e. song writers and producers) should be paid when someone steals their work and profits from it. What a foreign concept, huh?
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #69
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 ➡️
It's not my job as engineer to worry about sample clearance. They pay me to record and/or mix the song, end of story...
as a cab driver would you drive a masked, strapped dude to the bank?
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #70
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
10 mil $ is ridiculous anyway lol.
It is, and he'll get nothing like that.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #71
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
as a cab driver would you drive a masked, strapped dude to the bank?


Depends how nicely they ask.
Old 30th January 2013
  #72
Lives for gear
 
steveswisher's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
as a cab driver would you drive a masked, strapped dude to the bank?
Is it a friend of mine or a stranger? Is it Halloween?
Old 30th January 2013
  #73
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
as a cab driver would you drive a masked, strapped dude to the bank?
So everyone showing up to a session is "masked and strapped"? Are there metal detectors X-rays and dogs in every taxi? No.

It's not my job to clear samples, I'm an engineer.
Old 30th January 2013
  #74
Lives for gear
 
steveswisher's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 ➡️
It's not my job to clear samples, I'm an engineer.
+1
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #75
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Studio507 ➡️
So everyone showing up to a session is "masked and strapped"? Are there metal detectors X-rays and dogs in every taxi? No.

It's not my job to clear samples, I'm an engineer.
i hear you but isn't it all connected?

i mean people jump into this passionately and into detail explaining why miller did all the wrong yet they are the ones getting paid mixing these songs.
you know those instrumentals, you know it's not allowed.
just doesn't fully add up to me personally.

but again... i hear you, gotta eat.

Old 30th January 2013
  #76
Lives for gear
 
steveswisher's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by beat you down ➡️
i hear you but isn't it all connected?

i mean people jump into this passionately and into detail explaining why miller did all the wrong yet they are the ones getting paid mixing these songs.
you know those instrumentals, you know it's not allowed.
just doesn't fully add up to me personally.

but again... i hear you, gotta eat.

I don't feel that engineers or Disc Makers or volunteers handing out the mixtape should be responsible it. I believe blame legally and morally rests on the artist or DJ who commissioned the work.

I live in the US and theres no reason I need a car that can go 180 mph. If I get a speeding ticket the car manufacturer is not to blame even tho they're the ones who designed the car to be able to go that fast.

Sure, I can warn clients that they need to make sure to get their track cleared before putting online or distributing but after they leave with the track the responsibility is theirs.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #77
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Just to clear up a few things that seem to be influencing the discussion.

First, someone mentioned loading something into your sampler. You can load something into your sampler, chop it, tweak it, combine it with MJ's Thriller, sing over it, play the kazoo on it, etc. provided you only doing it for personal use. That's protected under what's called "Fair Use." I'm dumbing it down, but provided you don't distribute it or broadcast (radio, tv, film, internet, etc.) and it's for your own personal enjoyment (ie. not the enjoyment of everyone else), then it's protected under fair use. So all you kiddies in your bedroom sampling away, you are fine provided you limit it to personal use.

Second, regarding engineers.... Generally, samples are not cleared until after the recording is made. Artist/label records the song, then they try and clear it. This is often because it just works logistically better that way. Sometimes you want to know if the record will sound good before you go spending the money trying to clear it (sometimes just attempting to negotiate the clearance can cost more than the recording costs). Sometimes the party you are sampling wants to hear the recording before signing off. Anyway, there are many many reasons why songs are typically recorded first, then cleared second. So, although one could say "it's not my job to clear samples as an engineer" which IS correct, it's also incredibly unrealistic to expect the engineer to be able to predict the future clearance. And remember, if all they are doing is recording the song in the studio, it's protected under fair use. So nobody is breaking the law recording a cover of Mariah Carey because up through that point it's fair use. They just can't distribute or broadcast it (generally speaking). Not sure if that made sense or not.
Old 30th January 2013
  #78
Lives for gear
 
steveswisher's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris carter ➡️
Just to clear up a few things that seem to be influencing the discussion.

First, someone mentioned loading something into your sampler. You can load something into your sampler, chop it, tweak it, combine it with MJ's Thriller, sing over it, play the kazoo on it, etc. provided you only doing it for personal use. That's protected under what's called "Fair Use." I'm dumbing it down, but provided you don't distribute it or broadcast (radio, tv, film, internet, etc.) and it's for your own personal enjoyment (ie. not the enjoyment of everyone else), then it's protected under fair use. So all you kiddies in your bedroom sampling away, you are fine provided you limit it to personal use.

Second, regarding engineers.... Generally, samples are not cleared until after the recording is made. Artist/label records the song, then they try and clear it. This is often because it just works logistically better that way. Sometimes you want to know if the record will sound good before you go spending the money trying to clear it (sometimes just attempting to negotiate the clearance can cost more than the recording costs). Sometimes the party you are sampling wants to hear the recording before signing off. Anyway, there are many many reasons why songs are typically recorded first, then cleared second. So, although one could say "it's not my job to clear samples as an engineer" which IS correct, it's also incredibly unrealistic to expect the engineer to be able to predict the future clearance. And remember, if all they are doing is recording the song in the studio, it's protected under fair use. So nobody is breaking the law recording a cover of Mariah Carey because up through that point it's fair use. They just can't distribute or broadcast it (generally speaking). Not sure if that made sense or not.
Great points. In the case of mixtapes, do you think liability could be placed on a CD printing place such as DiscMakers? By the time it's getting printed it should be past the sample clearing stage.
Old 30th January 2013
  #79
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Lord Finesse is a ddouuche for that lawsuit

I dont care about the loopholes of legalities all you geeks are talking about

Hes prolly low on cash nowadays

I hope every single artist he sampled in the past without paying goes after him
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #80
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveswisher ➡️
do you think liability could be placed on a CD printing place such as DiscMakers? By the time it's getting printed it should be past the sample clearing stage.
No. If you've ever had a CD pressed, you'd have gotten and signed a document stating that "you have all legal rights to be pressing what you're pressing, and Disc Makers is in no way responsible for copyright infringement". Standard procedure.
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #81
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Below Zero ➡️

I dont care about the loopholes of legalities all you geeks are talking about
What "loopholes and legalities"? Oh, you mean the normal way that music business has been conducted forever? That's like saying if I steal your car and get caught, I was simply tripped up on a "loophole or legality". Maybe you should know what you're talking about, first, before you comment- otherwise you just end up betraying your lack of savvy.

The general amount of ignorance toward the music business, by people who strive to be a part of it, is simply appalling.
Old 30th January 2013
  #82
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Nope

Im right, ur wrong

Finesse is a ddouuche
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #83
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Below Zero ➡️
Nope

Im right, ur wrong

Finesse is a ddouuche
Wow, guess that's what I get for trying to discuss Music Law with a 5 year old. Have fun playing with samples.
Old 30th January 2013
  #84
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
I kno ur right legally

I still hope all his uncleared samples haunt him
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #85
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Below Zero ➡️

I still hope all his uncleared samples haunt him
How do you know that he didn't clear his samples? This is where you're losing your grip on the discussion. Most likely they were cleared legally, as that seems to be the operating assumption in this thread. It makes logical, legal, and obvious sense that Finesse did this in the first place (if he didn't clear it originally, there would not be a legal case here). Again, read Chris Carter's original post... it seems like you skipped it, or maybe didn't understand it completely.
Old 30th January 2013
  #86
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
On this track yes

But most likely theres beats hes done that he didnt clear em

I hope they come back to haunt him

Too bad finesse aint got that mac miller music money tho it might not be worth it
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #87
Moderator
 
Bender412's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveswisher ➡️
Great points. In the case of mixtapes, do you think liability could be placed on a CD printing place such as DiscMakers? By the time it's getting printed it should be past the sample clearing stage.
Liability CAN, and I believe HAS BEEN placed on manufacturers. Any party that distributes copyrighted material can be held liable, including distributors and retail outlets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiborg ➡️
No. If you've ever had a CD pressed, you'd have gotten and signed a document stating that "you have all legal rights to be pressing what you're pressing, and Disc Makers is in no way responsible for copyright infringement". Standard procedure.
This is no longer true. It's been at LEAST several years now since Discmakers and other big manufacturers stopped pressing CDs with known samples, unless licensing documentation is presented.
Old 30th January 2013
  #88
Lives for gear
 
steveswisher's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender412 ➡️
Liability CAN, and I believe HAS BEEN placed on manufacturers. Any party that distributes copyrighted material can be held liable, including distributors and retail outlets.



This is no longer true. It's been at LEAST several years now since Discmakers and other big manufacturers stopped pressing CDs with known samples, unless licensing documentation is presented.
Good to know. Thanks.
Old 30th January 2013
  #89
Lives for gear
 
orangeoctane's Avatar
My *ignore* list grows by the day on this forum...
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
ncoak's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse381 ➡️
the Finesse guy
📝 Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump