IS IT LEGAL TO USE SAMPLES FROM MOVIES?

[mike moriarty]

I've read a lot about the fair use laws and other things, and it pretty much says " as long as your not making money or selling crap-loads of albums" there shouldn't be anything to worry about. Especially since most of the flicks I'm using dioluge from are old, unknown, exploitation movies.

 

The closest comparison I can come up with is Mortician but waaaaaay better. I have a hard time believing that Will Rahmer contacted everyone who owns the rights to the hundreds of samples he uses.

 

I'm not looking to sell and make money from it, I just want it to be heard.

Thanks for the input guys.

[leftystratman]

this is something I read somewhere that if you create something unique and independent of the film itself, I think you can call it an "art" and it's legal to use it.

 

otherwise it's like saying it's illegal to use Fender guitars on your album without the consent from Fender.

 

use it on your song is not the same as duplicating the movie and sell it as a movie.

 

but I can be very wrong.

[daddymack]

I've read a lot about the fair use laws and other things, and it pretty much says " as long as your not making money or selling crap-loads of albums" there shouldn't be anything to worry about. Especially since most of the flicks I'm using dioluge from are old, unknown, exploitation movies. The closest comparison I can come up with is Mortician but waaaaaay better. I have a hard time believing that Will Rahmer contacted everyone who owns the rights to the hundreds of samples he uses. I'm not looking to sell and make money from it, I just want it to be heard. Thanks for the input guys.

Actually, I will be willing to bet that the legal department of Crash Records did their due diligence in getting clearance on the samples. In our litigous society, no business wants to expose themselves to unneccessary legal action, regardless how frivolous it may seem, every lawsuit costs time and money..

[fuzzball]

 

this is something I read somewhere that if you create something unique and independent of the film itself, I think you can call it an "art" and it's legal to use it. otherwise it's like saying it's illegal to use Fender guitars on your album without the consent from Fender. use it on your song is not the same as duplicating the movie and sell it as a movie. but I can be very wrong.

 

 

 

Yes, wrong.

[medvejonok]

I've read a lot about the fair use laws and other things, and it pretty much says " as long as your not making money or selling crap-loads of albums" there shouldn't be anything to worry about. Especially since most of the flicks I'm using dioluge from are old, unknown, exploitation movies. The closest comparison I can come up with is Mortician but waaaaaay better. I have a hard time believing that Will Rahmer contacted everyone who owns the rights to the hundreds of samples he uses. I'm not looking to sell and make money from it, I just want it to be heard. Thanks for the input guys.

 

It doesn't matter if you aren't making money off the music yet. Promotional use is considered to have value, so even if it is just a promo piece, you could get the legal smackdown.

 

AND, the way it works isn't simply that they send you a cease and desist order giving you the opportunity to say "I'm sorry, I'll stop and never do it again." If they make the case that you willfully infringed copyright (which they can prove by citing this very discussion that indicates you were aware you might be doing something illegal) then you could be liable for statutory damages (rather than actual damages) of up to $150,000 per infringement. Do you really want to take that kind of risk?

[fuzzball]

Plus, they can hit you for damages even if you stop using the material.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

YES, totally LEGAL and free of any charge, but only if you are a member of AL KHAIDA, Al TALIBAN or work as stewardess for AIR TURBAN !!!!!!!

 

.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

You can use samples for free from a movie DVD-VIDEO when you own a legal copy of the DVD, and your music CD is only for privat use withhin your family. However, in some countries ripping and the demultiplexing of any lazer disc is illegal, except you are the owner of the product.

 

.

[mike moriarty]

Ok????? Of course their DVD's I own, if that makes any difference. They are usually about 30 seconds of someone talking about some stupid s**t, and I use a lot, so it could possibly take years to actually find, and get a hold of the owners of the rights, if I can even find that information.

 

So you guys say they will sue me 150,000$ per infringement, like I have that kind of money. So then they are going to throw me in jail for a 30 second sample of someone talking in their movies from 25 years ago, I doubt it. Especially if I'm not making money.

 

I'm a huge horror movie fan and it's more of an homage then trying to rip them off.

[daddymack]

 

Ok????? Of course their DVD's I own, if that makes any difference. They are usually about 30 seconds of someone talking about some stupid s**t, and I use a lot, so it could possibly take years to actually find, and get a hold of the owners of the rights, if I can even find that information. So you guys say they will sue me 150,000$ per infringement, like I have that kind of money. So then they are going to throw me in jail for a 30 second sample of someone talking in their movies from 25 years ago, I doubt it. Especially if I'm not making money. I'm a huge horror movie fan and it's more of an homage then trying to rip them off.

 

 

Just do the due diligence. Try to get in touch with whoever holds the rights to the film (it should be on the package) and send them a letter asking if they would have a problem with it. Send it registered/ receipt confirmation. No response could be taken as a tacit approval. Then if anything happens, you can say, 'I tried to get clearance from them, they did not respond'. Not that hard, trust me.

[Give it a pull]

Just do the due diligence. Try to get in touch with whoever holds the rights to the film (it should be on the package) and send them a letter asking if they would have a problem with it. Send it registered/ receipt confirmation. No response could be taken as a tacit approval. Then if anything happens, you can say, 'I tried to get clearance from them, they did not respond'. Not that hard, trust me.

 

Dontcha lub it when people dont get the answers they wanna hear

[mike moriarty]

No, it's just that at this point I'm really confused. One person says yes, one person says no, one person says yes, ect.

[WoodenTaco]

Ok, I can't believe it has taken this long for somebody to say this..

Never look for legal advice on the internet. Just don't. Law is unbelievably complicated and getting advice from a bunch of guys on Harmony Central is like going on Yahoo answers asking how to do a liver transplant. 90% of what you get will be flat-out incorrect.

 

Bottom line, find a lawyer, and then ask them. Too many details and intricacies for anyone here to explain. This is why people go to years and years of law school.

[medvejonok]

Ok, I can't believe it has taken this long for somebody to say this.. Never look for legal advice on the internet. Just don't. Law is unbelievably complicated and getting advice from a bunch of guys on Harmony Central is like going on Yahoo answers asking how to do a liver transplant. 90% of what you get will be flat-out incorrect. Bottom line, find a lawyer, and then ask them. Too many details and intricacies for anyone here to explain. This is why people go to years and years of law school.

 

+1 The best approach is to get professional legal advice on this.

 

That said, what a responsible lawyer will tell you is more or less what is in my previous post. From your point of view, it's a question of weighing risk. CAN they do what I suggested in my earlier post? Absolutely! WILL they? Chances are that they won't find out, but if they do you, you are in deep shit. All it takes is someone who wants to make an example of you to deter others from doing the same thing. Whether or not your work is a tribute is not a legal argument that holds water. The fact is, if you willfully seek to derive value of any kind from the unauthorized infringement of someone else's copyrighted work, then you are exposed to significant legal liability.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

It is practical impossible to get the permission and licence of existing audio and video from the owners of the rights. ASCAP as well all other society of composers, authors and publishers, only give you a list of the right owners, then you have to contact each owner by your own.

 

For example: a British band recorded a Rolling Stones song, I think is was Oasis, they had all licences from the owner, that's what they thought, but missed to get the licence from the producer and co-owner; 250'000 maxi CD had to be destroyed and withdrawn from the shops, then the name of that producer had to be added and the maxi went into pressing again.

 

As said, you can not sell your CD with samples on it, but only use it private withhin your family who lives in your household. You can not give it away as present either, this is already illegal.

 

.

[leftystratman]

so if it's a safe bet to get a license and permission to use the samples, how much fees in general are we talking here? has anyone here gone through the process and can this person explain in detail what he / she has done to get the proper permission and so on instead of a bunch of musicians with no experience doing it, like you and me, speculating?

[mike moriarty]

 

so if it's a safe bet to get a license and permission to use the samples, how much fees in general are we talking here? has anyone here gone through the process and can this person explain in detail what he / she has done to get the proper permission and so on instead of a bunch of musicians with no experience doing it, like you and me, speculating?

 

 

 

 

 

What he said.

[Manipulate]

Haha, I love these threads.

 

I studied this topic extensively in lawschool.

 

The answer is, . . . the Courts haven't really figured out the answer yet so your only 100% safe bet is to clear everything you sample.

 

While it might matter whether its dialogue or music, there's no clear answer there either. In fact some actors and muscians are now making claims based on trademark too. For instance, Micheal Jackson may say he has a trademark scream that can't be sampled without getting a license for the trademark as well.

 

But yeah, you don't have the money for all this so you pretty much need to risk it or not do it. Just remember you're taking a risk, that's all. Most good lawyers would advise you not to take the risk.

[fuzzball]

Do not take that risk.

 

Get permission.

[mike moriarty]

Too late (see link below)

[brassic]

 

For example: a British band recorded a Rolling Stones song, I think is was Oasis, they had all licences from the owner, that's what they thought, but missed to get the licence from the producer and co-owner; 250'000 maxi CD had to be destroyed and withdrawn from the shops, then the name of that producer had to be added and the maxi went into pressing again.

 

 

Are you thinking of The Verve's "Bittersweet Symphony"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony

 

They used a sample of an orchestral version of a Stones song. They were eventually ordered to change the songwriting credits to Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, and the copyright reverted to the label who owns the rights to the Stones' 1960s recordings.

 

WRT the original post...

 

I've seen this issue come up several times. One example that came up last month - the band contacted a hipster artist friend of theirs and asked him to remix their single. Remix came out really well, the record company execs loved it. "Hey, let's use this as the b-side to the single!" Only problem is that the hipster artist used a 2-3 second sample of dialogue from an audio book in the remix as an intro to the song. It's was a free audio book, fairly obscure, but the band management was having trouble contacting the copyright owner (no response). Record label decided to not take any chances and insisted the sample be edited out before they would release the song. There was talk of using the song as promo-only and not including it on the single, but no dice. Record company wouldn't touch it with a bargepole until the sample was either cleared or removed.

 

This article on the BBC website contains info on clearing samples, and makes a specific mention WRT re-recording samples (you still may need to clear it), and to sampling speech. It's specific to the UK, but it's fairly indicative of how complicated the laws surround this issue are:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onemusic/legal/samplep01.shtml

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

 

Are you thinking of The Verve's "Bittersweet Symphony"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony

 

 

I think that's the case, the date 1997 is about right.

 

There was another affair with a sample on a Michael Jackson record, in which the Chicago Symphony Orchestra claimed that the sample was from one of their recordings, and after the fact of not getting a licence in advance, they wanted $28'000'000 of licence for it, I don't remember how they settled.

 

.