Go to bottom

Agenda Circling Forth - soundtrack discussion

category: music [glöplog]
numtek, if someone thinks remixing our stuff makes for good music, by all means! We're definitely not a hypocrites in that sense. But simply reselling the same thing isn't what we're talking about here, so please don't get your panties in a knot. We are not making money off of this, nor are we simply blindly stamping our name on top of someone else's. We figure finding the source for the songs is a part of the fun. I can agree though that it would've been in better taste to credit it directly as the scene is known to bitch about such things. :)
seriously, did anyone really think that these guys did their own 70:ies style recording and THEN sampled it?

you don't listen to a lot of postrock / indie nowadays, do you :)
added on the 2010-04-09 13:25:35 by Gargaj Gargaj

Let us eat them then.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:28:32 by leGend leGend
seriously, did anyone really think that these guys did their own 70:ies style recording and THEN sampled it?

i would have been shocked (and pleased) if a scene musician could have created such an expressive song. :) so no, it wasnt surprising :P
added on the 2010-04-09 13:33:44 by button button
what gloom said.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:33:53 by teo teo
qmotvs: Cybernetic Cannibalism

quite ontopic actually.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:34:17 by psenough psenough
what's funny is that the heavily ripped parts were my least favorite from the soundtrack. win/win.
i think there should be more demos with field recordings.

and watch everyone get equally hysterical on why the crickets and the streams and cars passing by werent duly credited!

because its in the law that every single resampled fart should generate 28694k of metadata duly registering the sampling source and properly distribute all the .2 cents per year that your project is receiving from the mafiaa to their rightful owners!!

wont someone think of the artists children?!
added on the 2010-04-09 13:38:54 by psenough psenough
Since we're talking a lot about copyright, you just can't label anything as remix and think it's therefor on the legal side of things. If you're dealing with this the upright way you'll always have to ask the artist being remixed *first*.

In the end i fucking don't care if anything is a remix, mashup or whatever. I even like the track. It's not the point, the content itself isn't questioned.

I always thought that competitions inside the demoscene were about *own* and individual work. How did we use to bash scanned pics in the past? What about not giving credits for using 4klang in 4k somewhere?

From the Breakpoint rules

"Entries have to be free of third party rights unless you have a legal license to use the given content. So no ripped music, no movie snippets, no closeups of trademarked logos, etc. Due to a number of unfortunate incidents in 2007, we had to tighten our rules in this regard. Violations will result in immediate disqualification. If you are unsure what exactly is allowed and what isn't, visit the copyright page that explains things in detail."

Any questions?
added on the 2010-04-09 13:39:03 by rp^frstl rp^frstl
i would have been shocked (and pleased) if a scene musician could have created such an expressive song. :) so no, it wasnt surprising :P

*listens for the sound of 10000 nectarine fans descending on homeworld with fists...*
added on the 2010-04-09 13:42:25 by MeteoriK MeteoriK
In addition, from the copyright page at breakpoint.untergrund.net

"All content that is used in your production and that wasn't produced by you or anyone else involved in it qualifies as third-party content (content includes not only graphics and sound, but also code). You may use third-party content in your production if its license allows you to - this is the case with several of the creative commons licenses as well as most open source licenses. Some of these licenses may impose additional restrictions (for example, if you use GPLed code, you are required to provide the source code to your production). You may also use third-party content that is not under such a license if (and only if) you have a signed permit by the copyright holder.

You are required to credit all third-party content properly (a note in an info-file and in the "info" field of the entry submission sheet is fine) unless its license explicitly states that you do not have to.

Several important exceptions to german copyright law are granted by the right to cite (Zitatrecht, §51 UrhG). You may not only quote texts, but also music, images and videos/films. The main points are:
The quoted material has to be sourced properly (as mentioned previously, a note in the readme and on the submission form is enough).
Your work has to be copyrightable. This is the case as soon as your production contains a substantial amount of original work; if it doesn't, you're not allowed to submit it as per the general compo rules anyway, so this shouldn't be a problem.
Quotes have to be verbatim and clearly recognizable (though they may be shortened as long as the original message isn't distorted).
The amount of material quoted must be "appropriate for the purpose of the quote" - in general, quoting single phrases (say, 2-3 lines for text/vocals, a few bars for music, <10 seconds for films/movies) should be OK, while quoting whole sections of a longer text (or a complete short text), a whole theme or the complete vocals from a piece of music, or a whole scene from a film/movie generally isn't."
added on the 2010-04-09 13:43:53 by rp^frstl rp^frstl
rp: if parties need to have that rule in order to take place then i totally agree they should enforce it. but i cant possibly agree that a non-profit underground digital art culture should care much about legal restrictions on comercialized artwork imposed by economic lobbies in our society.

artists should voice against restrictions and conformism to begin with.

and demoscene geeks aswell for that matter.

imho ofcourse.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:46:25 by psenough psenough
i cant possibly agree that a non-profit underground digital art culture should care much about legal restrictions on comercialized artwork imposed by economic lobbies in our society

it's not so much an ethical issue but a technical one - imagine your party gets sued and shut down because of that.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:48:16 by Gargaj Gargaj
@ blamstrain : JSYK : I love your remix. Better than the original, but like rpfr said: "the content itself isn't questioned." The fact that the demo won has (I think) a lot to do with the soundtrack. So keep up the good work! And now over live to our reporters analysing the copyright issue :
added on the 2010-04-09 13:51:33 by numtek numtek

especially the scene should care about insisting on "original" work and content, especially in competitions. what's next then? "oh, i'm sorry, i used some code from xxx, stole the music from yyy and grabbed graphics from an amazing artist that nobody knows"?

added on the 2010-04-09 13:52:09 by rp^frstl rp^frstl
i like the track immensely and I see matching such a track to the demo visuals as an artform in itself.. just as a DJ goes digging for those obscure records that are forgotten and reintroduce them or introduce them to an audience for the first time. The Varia project seems pretty much like DJ Cut Chemist and DJ Shadows Lessons which aimed to educate people about our musical past in a more contemporary setting. Fuck the haters, stop being so narrow minded!

Homeworld: well why not try watching/listening Blunderbuss by fairlight and im sure there will be many others that have equally as expressive and artistic flow. *FIST*
added on the 2010-04-09 13:52:24 by dv$ dv$
I copied all my dance moves on Sunday night off Oliver Reed. Do I need to do any credits?
added on the 2010-04-09 13:53:02 by MeteoriK MeteoriK
I don't have an issue with the fact that it's a remix. In fact, I don't give a flying fuck, as long as it sounds nice. The fact that it's not been credited as such is what's wrong.

Same thing with graphics; I don't mind to see some copied/wired gfx in a demo, really. I just don't like it when people claim that it's *all* their work.
We've meanwhile learned that there are a few suspicious compo winners at Breakpoint. We are currently investigating these.

If someone has stolen competition prize money by cheating in the compos, we'll respond with drastic measures to this. The release will be disqualified, removed from our servers. The submitter will be banned from submitting anything to a Breakpoint competition for the next 3 years. If the cheater doesn't pay back the received prize money, he'll be completely banned from attending Breakpoint ever again.

Please report suspicious findings to scamp@untergrund.net. You may also post to this thread.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:55:37 by the_Ye-Ti the_Ye-Ti
first of all, i think the music fits the demo really well - and i have no trouble accepting that we use commercial music in demos if needed. also, blamstrain has a more modest approach and admits it should be credited. good. the other guy is as dumb and ignorant as they come.

ps, wtf are you talking about? there are no ifs or buts about this, this song is 100% ripped off. they use the idea of the song, they use the vocals, they use the lyrics and even the original instruments and melodies. what are you talking about crediting crickets for? have you lost your mind sir? give credit where credit is due! even though you may be a blamstrain fanboy - think for yourself. this has nothing to do with profit, legal rights etc etc. this is mostly about respect, having a sense of decency - and most of all behaving like a real musician.
added on the 2010-04-09 13:58:12 by xrs xrs
Source of the quote by the_Ye-Ti : http://pouet.net/topic.php?which=3968&page=1
added on the 2010-04-09 14:03:21 by numtek numtek
the_yeti: in other words, wait for the last BP and cheat like hell ;D
added on the 2010-04-09 14:04:42 by psonice psonice
Proper credits would have been good.
Respect the work of others if you want the same for you.

Now it feels a bit like touching fake boobies that were advertised to you as the real deal ;)
added on the 2010-04-09 14:06:52 by CONS CONS
due to some error the origin of samples was not mentioned.

so what, the tune is fucking awesome.

added on the 2010-04-09 14:12:33 by nosfe nosfe
Like rpfr said, the content itself isn't questioned.

The tune is awesome but:
- c'mon, 90% of the awesomeness comes from the original tune. Throwing more bass and a compressor is not what I'd call a remix... especially when the original artist didn't give you separate tracks
- you are not even close to what Girl Talk can do as mashup artist, if it's what you search for

The demo was a shock to me and learning how it was really done was frustrating to say the least.
added on the 2010-04-09 14:31:36 by ponce ponce


Go to top