scene music stolen
category: music [glöplog]
Just to add to gasmans diplomatic post. I think what makes it even more entertaining is the fact that these cries comes from the DEMOSCENE.
You know the master rippers of computer art.
How many has been sued by Boris valejo? 2unlimited? aha? etc. we have had a tradition for stealing with arms and legs, and pass it off as our own original art by adding a rotating cube and a sountrack that samples the future sounds of london or astral projection etc. not a small "bip" sample, a whole walking riff, that is the main theme, to the mix.
I still think the timberland case was quite dull, he did what we have been doing to people like him for ages, and we couldnt belive anybody would do such a thing teh lolzers. agreed the whole laromlab thing was badm but Akira you have no case, they have similarities in choice of notes and thats about it, they do not in any way sound the same to me.
You know the master rippers of computer art.
How many has been sued by Boris valejo? 2unlimited? aha? etc. we have had a tradition for stealing with arms and legs, and pass it off as our own original art by adding a rotating cube and a sountrack that samples the future sounds of london or astral projection etc. not a small "bip" sample, a whole walking riff, that is the main theme, to the mix.
I still think the timberland case was quite dull, he did what we have been doing to people like him for ages, and we couldnt belive anybody would do such a thing teh lolzers. agreed the whole laromlab thing was badm but Akira you have no case, they have similarities in choice of notes and thats about it, they do not in any way sound the same to me.
oh yeah, and thanks for the help shitheads!
eebliss: your track didn't sound familiar to me.
eebliss, the way Lo-bat uses the WAV channel of the Gameboy is kind of his "signature".
They have certainly sampled the guy -heavily-, I didn't say this is a case of "get song, change name, release". But it's Lo-bat's song right there. Just wondering how this whole thing was done, and if he gets credited in the song credits (like all sampling should)
So much for their alleged "We hacked an Atari suond chip and put it elsewhere" though, which is a big prop in every press they get.
This is an interesting bit about them though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Castles_%28band%29#Album_artwork
In any case, seems like if you take your scene music and slapbang a chick screaming on top of it, you get $$$. Go for it fellas :)
They have certainly sampled the guy -heavily-, I didn't say this is a case of "get song, change name, release". But it's Lo-bat's song right there. Just wondering how this whole thing was done, and if he gets credited in the song credits (like all sampling should)
So much for their alleged "We hacked an Atari suond chip and put it elsewhere" though, which is a big prop in every press they get.
This is an interesting bit about them though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Castles_%28band%29#Album_artwork
In any case, seems like if you take your scene music and slapbang a chick screaming on top of it, you get $$$. Go for it fellas :)
Quote:
Lo-Bat said:
What I don't find ok however is that they didn't respect the licence I choose for my music.
Creative commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike. Anybody can learn this by simply following this link on my site: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/be/deed.en_GB
In a nutshell: everybody is free to copy, remix, sample, redistribute my work as long as they give credit to me + use the same licence.
They didn't give me credit and clearly didn't use the same licence. If you're not ok with my terms then just sample somebody else, there's PLENTY of music out there to choose from.
He's going to contact them and see what comes up out of that.
Quote:
I know this is a lot to ask on Pouet, but can we get a sense of perspective here please?
I agree with gasman, but not with eeblis.
The difference between timbaland stealing a tune and the demoscene using commercial music in demos is that timbaland stole for profit.
The difference between timbaland stealing a tune and the demoscene using commercial music in demos is that timbaland stole for profit.
It's like comparing Robin Hood to Frank Sinatra.
And no, I'm not comparing Timbaland to Frank Sinatra!!!
There's also a big difference between copying a Boris picture that everyone can plainly see is a Boris picture, and claiming to be the original artist behind somebody else's work, not to mention being a jerk about it and more or less telling the original artist to fuck off. Making money off it only makes it many times worse, of course.
xernobyl: You're comparing Timbaland to Robin Hood?
"Robber in the Hood" would be an obvious joke. Don't go there. It's racist.
Quote:
There's also a big difference between copying a Boris picture that everyone can plainly see is a Boris picture, and claiming to be the original artist behind somebody else's work, not to mention being a jerk about it and more or less telling the original artist to fuck off. Making money off it only makes it many times worse, of course.
obviously, but the guy did add stuff of his own to the track he sampled. Hip hop and house artists have done this for ages, that including artists from the demoscene.
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=3457
Where in the demo does it say that the meat and potatoes of the track is in fact angelic particles made by Simon Postford aka Hallucinogen? and im not dissing it mind you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzQmeeXcDwQ
Why does the fact that there is money involved change everything? The ethics of it are the same afaic.
hempest cheers :)
ok. I wont press 'back' next time...
You really can't figure out why Timbaland ripping off tempest for a commercial song is worse than, say, someone using a commercial song in a demo? Are you stupid or something?
Timbaland didn't just use a sample, he took basically the whole intro section of acid jazzed evening and used it as the basis for do it. Sure he added a couple of drums and nelly furtados voice over it, but it is still basically the intro section to acid jazzed evening. Even this would be fine if he had tempests permission, but he didn't, and he released it as a commercial track to make money. Then he denied it and basically told tempest to go fuck himself because he's super awesome so he can do what he wants.
Using a commercial song in a demo is wrong, but nobody makes money out of it, and usually credit is given.
Timbaland didn't just use a sample, he took basically the whole intro section of acid jazzed evening and used it as the basis for do it. Sure he added a couple of drums and nelly furtados voice over it, but it is still basically the intro section to acid jazzed evening. Even this would be fine if he had tempests permission, but he didn't, and he released it as a commercial track to make money. Then he denied it and basically told tempest to go fuck himself because he's super awesome so he can do what he wants.
Using a commercial song in a demo is wrong, but nobody makes money out of it, and usually credit is given.
And yes, profiting from passing off others work as your own is worse than pretending you made something without making money out of it.
Quote:
You really can't figure out why Timbaland ripping off tempest for a commercial song is worse than, say, someone using a commercial song in a demo? Are you stupid or something?
No im not stupid, nor do i subscribe to the view that money changes the ethics involved in taking parts of someone elses tune, or the whole chorus/intro, add a few bells and whistles and rerelease it for whatever purpose, to the broader masses. This is what house and hip hop artists are doing all the time, and unlike what you assume often there are often no clearing of samples.
Quote:
Timbaland didn't just use a sample, he took basically the whole intro section of acid jazzed evening and used it as the basis for do it.
well there you just descibed just about all hip hop and house releases. So this time it was tempest, i wonder how many of the unknown soul musicians who are so often sampled ever got anything out of it.
i think youre mixing up ethics and morals. I can see how the moral of what Timbaland is doing is wrong, but the ethics involved are no different nomatter how much you yap away.
Quote:
And yes, profiting from passing off others work as your own is worse than pretending you made something without making money out of it.
why?
if you ignore context and situation where the moral choises take place, then of course "the ethics of it are the same". after that it doesn't really matter if robin hood steals from the poor and gives to the rich, because it's still stealing.
Quote:
house releases
I think you need to listen to more house.
Quote:
if you ignore context and situation where the moral choises take place, then of course "the ethics of it are the same". after that it doesn't really matter if robin hood steals from the poor and gives to the rich, because it's still stealing.
Well isnt it? The correct dealing, the honest one, would be to deal with the situation that he belives forces him to do it. If you have decided to steal from someone that the reality of the situation isnt it? i dont really belive in all the excuses people make for themself as justification like, "but i didnt make money from it". So, if i steal a ferrari for my own use only its ok i take it, im not making any money from it afterall.
Quote:
So, if i steal a ferrari for my own use only its ok i take it, im not making any money from it afterall.
Depends... if the guy you steal it from actually BUILT the Ferrari himself... ;)
lol, nice one xD