English 113 B
Professor Klepper
23 September, 2013
Music Sampling Rough Draft
Over the years, music artists have taken the work of former artists and used it as
their own. It varies on what usage of the work the new artists took, but if used without
permission it’s considered illegal under the copyright infringement law. The only way to
make this process legal is not only have permission but pay the original artist as well.
Although this sounds like a fair and easy process, only famous artists can realistically
afford to pay for sampling. There should be a new music sampling system where both
famous artists and up-and-coming artists can get sampling because it would make it fair
game for both sides. It would make way for more artists to take older music and evolve it
into their own, and not just let the rich artists get richer.
Walt Disney’s famous short film Steamboat Willie was actually copied from a film
that came out earlier that year called Steamboat Bill, Jr. Disney was allowed to do this
because their was no copyright law back then, but after his work was made, the copyright
law came in effect. In Lawrence Lessigs’ book Free Culture, he states “Early cartoons are
filled with knockoffs—slight variations on winning themes; retellings of ancient
stories. The key to success was the brilliance of the differences.” (Lessig 23) Just like
music artists today, they want to build up upon what former artists created and be noticed
for their input of brilliance and difference. Disney took an old idea and developed his
own, coming out with a much better product than the original. The goal of the new artist
is to come up with something better, but they are stopped by the copyright law, excluding
them from what only famous artists can afford.
I constantly make music, it has been a passion of mine for some time. If I was able
to take sampling from other songs and make it into my own, making music would be
much easier, it would even benefit the former artists as well. In Lessigs’ book Free
Culture, Lessig explains “By limiting the rights musicians have, by partially pirating their
creative work, the record producers, and the public, benefit.”(Lessig 58) Lessig says this
because by making the music free, the music becomes a type of advertisement for people
to come to enjoy. Once the people are hooked by the music, they become fans that want
to purchase merchandise or concert tickets to that artist. It’s the same for sampling as
well. By taking the original and making it your own, the new generation of society will
hear my music, and if I give credit to the original artist the new generation will see this.
Then people would start looking up the original song, making the original artist more
money. Basically what the new artist is doing is not just making money himself, but free
advertising for the former artist as well.
There’s a saying that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer, this statement in
our current sampling program is true. In order to use sampling legally, artists pay large
sums of money so they can use it to evolve the sound. Now if an regular guy off the street
tried sampling without paying, he would be sued large amounts of money he doesn’t
have. So it is basically impossible for normal guy to ever use sampling, for he can’t afford
to use sampling and if he does illegally, he would be sued for millions of dollars. The
famous artists however, can easily pay for the sampling coverage. Then they get their
money back plus lots more of it once their song or album is released. The current system
today is not fair and both groups need a fair hand involved with the sampling mix.
The Hip-Hop Industry is well known for sampling music. Not until the 80’s did
sampling come up in full launch scale. In Tonya M. Evans article, “Sampling,
Looping, and Mashing…. Oh My!: How Hip Hop Music is Scratching More Than the
Surface of Copyright Law” she says, “ … copyright law must be remixed to achieve
optimal balance between a copyright holder’s exclusive rights and the legal space a
second generation innovator needs to build upon existing works in order to create new
ones in cumulative creative genres like music.” She is agreeing with the statement to have
an equal terms between the original artists and the new artists so that the new artists can
create new music with old material. Making a system like this would benefit both
persons for they are both making profit by A: both promoting each other with their styles
of music. B: having people who wouldn’t know about your music become aware of your
sound, and C: once fans hear your music, they will want to see the artists in concert or
buy merchandise off them.
Music industry today is stuck in the Lou. There must be a system where both ends
of the Hip Hop game can have fair chance at sampling, otherwise the poor fall and the
rich keep getting higher to the top. Both artists benefit from the system, lowering the
costs for each of them, and the original artist gets free advertisement from the two artists.
Its is three way win streak, and if it was fair in the past (Walt Disney copying Steamboat
Bill, Jr. for the make of Steamboat Willie) then it should be fair now in the present. Once
the system is created, lots of new music will be developed making a great change in
music. Today’s fix up, can be tomorrow’s new gift of change.
Work Cited
Lessig, Lawrence: Free Culture; The Penguin Press 2004; pg. (23-58)
Tonya M. Evans. “Sampling, Looping, and Mashing…. Oh My!: How Hip Hop Music is Scratching More Than the Surface of Copyright Law” Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal 21 (2011): 843
