Members rasputin1963 Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 What do you make of a song like "Ghetto Superstar" by Mya Pras and Ol' Dirty Bastard: RtIGCGu9L90&feature=fvw Most of us immediately recognize that the chorus is a direct lift of Barry Gibb's "Islands In The Stream", a hit for Dolly Parton & Kenny Rogers in the early 1980's. This appropriation of the song is very strange, though: Parts of the original Barry Gibb lyric are borrowed intact. "Sail away with me", "We'll rely on each other" "From one lover to another". But other parts of the lyric have been added and/or changed: "Ghetto superstar" "To another place" (instead of "to another world").Lots of other stuff is added, too, most specifically a copious series of rap couplets. Where does a song like this fall in terms of copyright law...? Full royalties paid for the appropriation of the Barry Gibb song? More pointedly, in terms of sheer taste: Why would they appropriate a song ("Islands In The Stream") which has has little to do with the mood and milieu of where it ended up ("Ghetto Superstar"). Are Gibb/Parton/Rogers to be pleased with this....uh....remake? homage? Tribute? Or has this bit of music been imported dumbly, the way a mynah bird or parrot will reproduce sounds they've heard, totally ignorant of their meanings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 They will obviously, at the very least, pay for the use of the sample of the song, even if they are singing or rapping something very different over it. On top of that, they'll probably have to negotiate, either paying some songwriting royalties to the Brothers Gibb or some such thing, assuming that their record company is doing the right thing. As for the use of "Islands In The Stream", it could be the irony, maybe something else, I don't know, but rappers like to use interesting samples for inspiration from everywhere. I figured I'd actually attempt to answer your question before the inevitable knee-jerk reactions of how rap = crap and that they are stealing and it's theft by talentless thugs who can't sing and other spewings of grandpas everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 I also wanted to add that I used to know somebody who worked for Warner Bros. Music. His sole job, I kid you not, was to listen to music that Warner Bros was going to release to make certain that they had obtained the rights for any samples, appropriations, etc. before they would be released. His office literally consisted of a desk, a set of speakers, and not much else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 i don't give a damn wasn't composed by me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scarecrowbob Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 "Where does a song like this fall in terms of copyright law...? Full royalties paid for the appropriation of the Barry Gibb song?" In order to get a compulsory mechanical license, you have to stay within the scope of the original work-- you can't really change much other than to arrange the song so it works for your ensemble. Works like "Ghetto Superstar" almost certainly involve negotiations directly between the owners of "islands in the stream"'s lyrical and melodic content and the producers of the newer work in which some specific compensation is outlined. It was probably a lot of money by my standards, but who knows? There is no "gray area" in terms of IP: creating new works like these without the permission of the song's owners is an infringing use not covered by a compulsory mechanical license. I haven't listened closely to any of these songs, but it is quite possible that in those negotiations involved clearance of samples from the original work, but it is just as likely that the original was reperformed; an interesting point is that all this can be done without the permission of the entity who holds the rights to the sound recording, if that entity doesn't also own the publishing for the song. As for why "Islands in the Stream" (which shares a title with a Hemingway novel and features elements from ABBA'a "SOS"), I couldn't say. I think the song was very effective, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Works like "Ghetto Superstar" almost certainly involve negotiations directly between the owners of "islands in the stream"'s lyrical and melodic content and the producers of the newer work in which some specific compensation is outlined. It was probably a lot of money by my standards, but who knows? Correct. It's a big business now, licensing sampled parts of songs for new (often hip-hop/R&B) songs. There is no "gray area" in terms of IP: creating new works like these without the permission of the song's owners is an infringing use not covered by a compulsory mechanical license. Also correct. This is no gray area. They either already paid for the usage or they're in violation and will pay (more) later. It's the best bet to make your deal beforehand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 the most money is made with the back catalogue at the moment Bad Company is #2 in our catalogue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hard Truth Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 The US Supreme Court ruled that artists have a right to create a parody of a song, even without the composer's permission in the case involving Two Live Crew and the rights holders to Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 And the gray area there is, "When is it a parody?" But I think it's pretty obvious when you hear a Weird Al tune versus a hip-hop song that samples the entire chorus of an older rock tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bp Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 I don't think that ODB cares anymore.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 The US Supreme Court ruled that artists have a right to create a parody of a song, even without the composer's permission in the case involving Two Live Crew and the rights holders to Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman." Campbell v Acuff-Rose It's important to note from Campbell that, while parody enjoys a fair use defensibility, satire does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flatfinger Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Where does a song like this fall in terms of copyright law...? The laws are the laws , and no one can predict how a the squires, judge , and jury will adjudicate a paticular case ( civil for damges.... remember that Mickey D hot coffee and other such wild outcomes are always possible). The suit has to be brought by someone who expects that they can win more than bringing the case will cost them . If they can prove Plagiarism ( no wait ...copyright infringement ) then they can lighten someones wallet . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism Plagiarism is not copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship Maybe you can put in a poll and see how the HC collective /Hive mind sees it ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 There is no "gray area" in terms of IP: creating new works like these without the permission of the song's owners is an infringing use not covered by a compulsory mechanical license. Correct. It's a "derivative work", and US copyright laws specifically mention that the right to do any derivative works belongs to the original composers / copyright owners. That includes lyrical re-writes, so odds are better than good that they negotiated that before Ghetto Superstar was released... and if they didn't, then they would be in serious legal jeopardy IMO. Of course, I'm not an attorney, so please don't take that as "legal advice" - when in doubt, discuss things with a qualified legal representative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted August 21, 2009 Author Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Or does it come from record labels with huge catalogs of dog recordings that they can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 I also toyed with this conspiracy theory..... Maybe the (remaining) Gibbs orchestrated this whole thing?I think it goes both ways. There Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Sometimes I wonder who is actually behind these genres of music. Does it really come from a culture of disrespectful young pirates who blaspheme the gods? Or does it come from record labels with huge catalogs of dog recordings that they can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Initially it had nothing at all to do with labels. The early rap pioneer's just sampled stuff that sounded cool and made beats and tracks. Only quite a bit later did publishers enter the picture and begin suing for royalties. At this point there may be some publishers who push songs to be sampled to artists, but I think for the most part you have artists who just dig a certain groove or sound and they sample it from wherever it comes from, and pay accordingly. Most publishers and labels have legal people who deal with this all day.My hypothesis does not require that anyone sue anyone. All you need is a label with a library of legacy hits. I see two benefits for the label.It's a win-win situation. The new Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Btw, please don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jon Gnash Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Initially it had nothing at all to do with labels. The early rap pioneer's just sampled stuff that sounded cool and made beats and tracks.I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 21, 2009 Members Share Posted August 21, 2009 Hmmmm...that doesn't strike me as the stuff of legends. As far as I know, that's how it happened, and it sounds logical. How would you think it went down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jotown Posted August 22, 2009 Members Share Posted August 22, 2009 I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the stranger Posted August 22, 2009 Members Share Posted August 22, 2009 I also wanted to add that I used to know somebody who worked for Warner Bros. Music. His sole job, I kid you not, was to listen to music that Warner Bros was going to release to make certain that they had obtained the rights for any samples, appropriations, etc. before they would be released. His office literally consisted of a desk, a set of speakers, and not much else. I want that job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.