If I have a label coming after me for a beat that I made then I’ll know I’m starting to get somewhere with my art. That’s my whole mindset with sampling
Same. Most of us are not close to popular in terms of music popularity, so if I ever put out something with an uncleared sample, and then the label gets mad at me, I’ll be annoyed, but also happy
1. If you made a beat with the uncleared sample, say u put it on youtube. Someone may still it. And u can't do nothing about it, cuz you yourself did it "illigaly" 2. You're not gonna be able to upload it on streaming services and beat markets, like Beatstars. Am I wrong somewhere?
This is what I've been thinking but is is true that if you use an unclear sample the law says you can be banned from publishing music , I've sampled 5 seconds from a Beatles song and just debating whether to post it cos of the risks
@@wakeup.1990i made a beat in 2011 I heard Timbaland play that ish from some kid claiming he made it in a tweet. You grossly underestimate the pettiness of the music industry and the Internet in general
Same here, I haven’t took any money at all from my label and don’t plan on doing it as because I’m doing this outta my enjoyment and not really for any needed financial support, so if the sample labels contact me about it and require money I’ll just hand it over to them lmao
I found this very helpful. Regardless of The fact people have been doing this for years, there are new artists and indie labels that don’t know simple pearls like this. Not giving legal advice but educating people on what you have seen others do, is the proper way to side-step legal liability. Very smooth & nicely done. Thank you for the insight!
BROV!!!! I've been telling young artist and fellow practitioners of the art of sampling to just get sued... It's a great problem... Just don't fight it. Give respect and credit and pay the folks what they want. Clear goin forward. Thank you kind sir
Honestly I agree with you. Although I will say it's easier to just "remake" a sample by having someone cover it. Kanye did that with all falls down because Lauren Hill didn't clear the sample
Ask for forgiveness, not for permission. Pretty much if you make the sample, and if it blows up, be ready because the label will come wanting. They are pleased their work is getting traffic, but they want a share of it.
DJ Pain did that trick with Timbaland's sample. The song was successfull. Then Timbaland's people came. Timbaland took all 100% of earnings. What a great negotiation! Seriously, when you make a song that breaks copyright law - the copyright holder will be in strong position. They are not going to negotiate.
"Ask for forgiveness" is a wonderful option. Im happy to know that it exists. Thanks for the concise video. Cheers. ( My channel contains unique samples and entertainment :D)
some dips have algorithms now that won't even upload your music that has a license from a major especially if you use loops chopping is different but if it goes big what was stated in the video will happen But just create and put your music out no regrets and if someone wants to get a cut from something you sampled don't fight that. its that artist or groups right just love the creativity process and make the art
Wow, give to the local clinic! They love seeing you again! Thank god for the turn around! Not so funny know is this! I'm sure this is scean more clear these days!
Thanks Tony for telling it like it is. As an artist, would being a member of ASCAP or some other organization like that let me know if my music was being sampled in someone's work?
@@tonyvv is correct. However, if all your music has an isrc associated with the song files then you should be able to track by that. But if they are making any money and your isrc is attached to their song you should also be receiving royalties. You can look up your royalty statements with your distributor website.
A client of mine made a mixtape with samples on it, and we got a notification from Disc Makers saying they wouldn’t even produce our physicals until we got licenses. We even notified DM of our intent to give the discs away for free. BS IMHO
If a sample is very obvious and lengthy our anti piracy software will catch it, and we are then obligated to follow up and verify. Personally I think sampling is a victimless crime, but as a large company we do have to abide by the “official” rules. 🤷🏼♂️
@@tonyvv Well said. You must protect yourself as an individual because it is you that will be judged individually apart from even everyone else in your company. Artists should think to clear someone else’s original work before being blamed and at fault.
Basically I have seen 1000s of different indie rap cassette tapes pressed by Disc Makers in the 90s and I doubt if they ever asked for sample clearance because 90% of these used sampled of well known songs. Probably the policy changed a lot since then, because if I'm not wrong, you could even make an unauthorised press on these tapes up to 100 or 200 CrO2 cassette copies because they were so indie and so many orders that people who is making all mastering work wouldn't even notice even if it was already pressed by Disc Makers and had a caution line about prohibited by law. It's prohibited, but who would know in that large space of millions of different indie artists.
I would imagine the copyright/license is owned worldwide tbh. Most either do or have different companies handling licenses for different territories. If it's over a hundred years old I think it becomes public domain. You still can't sample it but if it's re-created, I don't think you have to clear it.
I did this same thing, made something, not thinking about selling it, but now it evolved to something i want to sell, but now i must remove the samples and or recreate them myself. I normally don't like using samples, and im back to □1
What if you’re the artist creating the samples ? Do you /should you try to get a content ID on them through Distrokid or upload to Ascap or BMI before selling them ?
What if the original label would never have given permission if they'd been asked . . .do they have any legal recourse against those who unlawfully used their property? I would hope so.
I was learning more about certain rights and recording for the reason that I do not own beats but I would like to own my lyrics . RU-vid Copyright Exceptions Copyright exceptions are laws that allow you to reuse someone else’s copyright-protected material without getting their permission, but only under certain circumstances.
Romano Law : Licenses can get complicated depending on the length and nature of the music sample. A sample so brief that the underlying composition is unrecognizable may only require a license to use the sound recording.
not everyone is talented enough to be the whole band and they shouldn't be expected to be. You can't expect a guitarist to be able to play the drums and the sax. DAWS (digital audio workstations) that you use to make sampled based beats are instruments all on their own. Using samples is about bringing everything together so you can give the rapper a canvas to use to rap on
But can we actually re-record the portion of a sample we want to use and get away with that even if project goes viral? And instead of using word sampling we would claim it's a cover.
A question to anyone out there. Let’s say you had a put out a track with uncleared samples on it. Would you still be withdrawing earnings from that track or would you not withdraw earnings from the track in the case that the track gets popular? Does it make a difference?
I’m a fairly small artist , I have used the amen break.... I expect this track to sell 1k -2k.... I will find a suitable fairly small label..... so with this I expect the major label will not come chasing.... if they do we have to work something with the royalties?? 2. How would this work if I have don’t have the sample cleared and my track is played on a major radio station?
I just have on question. I believe it’s against the policy of distrokid and other distribution companies to release songs with uncleared samples. Will you get in trouble with them for releasing your music or isn’t it until labels notice you’ve used their song that you have to deal with it?
I have been releasing heavy sampled music with my distributor, Reverbnation, since 2015 and I have released records over 3 million streams and yet I have never had a problem with my distributor or the retailers. However I just learned that it is wrong for me to have music on these platforms, making money off of them without them being cleared and I will take them down very soon. Mainly because I’m in Christ now and these songs are ungodly. But ultimately now moving forward I have to clear these songs before releasing them in the manner I have done for all these years.
If I am the owner, do I have to register my samples before others get access to them? I’m trying to figure this out because people are asking for my sounds and I don’t know what todo about it because they are not songs, but also I’m worried that some samples are sections I have given to other independent artists for their records and I haven’t changed a thing yet. I’m not sure how to go about this, does this make me a session sample maker who then should charge for my time if it’s just on another person’s record or should I register it first and then they pay a license to me? Any advice from anyone would be really helpful right now before I send more stuff out. Cheers
I think it just potentially makes it cheaper to clear, maybe half the cost. I recently contacted a few sample clearance companies about all this and the costs where a bit ridiculous, I can understand why people just take the chance. You would need the return on a track to be around £5000 before you even make anything. And then what you make will depend on what the original holders want from it anyway.
i’m no artist or songwriter or anything but let’s say i wanted to sample some drums from a song. if i liked how it was and posted it on soundcloud or youtube and it ended up blowing up, would i get in trouble for copyright claim, meaning will there be legal issue that would have to be solved. i don’t got the money or anything i just want to sample some fun beats. but i just need to make sure that if a song of mine with a sample blows up what do i do?
This is what I've been thinking but is is true that if you use an unclear sample the law says you can be banned from publishing music , I've sampled 5 seconds from a Beatles song and just debating whether to post it cos of the risks
How could one be banned from publishing altogether? If you really blow up, the labels may stress you enough financially to make you shut down your own label, if you have any. That's the worst I can think of. Then, you either publish solo or go to another label, with all the clout gained from the song that blown enough to make anyone care to sue you. It's not like there's a world government for music that could exclude you from its structures... Yet.
You can't do that anymore because labels will scan your track with A.I. to check for samples and will refuse to release it in the first place if you don't have the license. So if you intend to 'blow up' on Soundcloud, or RU-vid you might be okay, but otherwise? 🤷
Ummm it’s not reassuring that you’re basically like “Yeah I’m not liable for what happens if you get sent to copyright infringement jail (i.e. if you get sued into oblivion for hundreds of thousands of dollars you don’t have or w/e), but it’ll probably be fine. 🤷” I’ll have to talk to some other musicians, people in the industry who have dealt with this more than I have, because if it really is that simple- if that’s the standard, accepted practice, & it’s just a matter of paying a reasonable royalty if/when a song blows up & they come asking for it- then that would be great, because I’d love to just be able to sample songs without worry… But I can recall a lot of cases earlier in the history of sample-based music (for instance stuff discussed in a really good documentary about the history of sampling I saw years ago) where they essentially concluded that it was next to impossible to sample artists like the Beatles or Michael Jackson because of how prohibitively expensive (or unwilling to clear samples) the holders of the copyrights/masters are, & that basically albums like Dangermouse’s Grey Album (mixing the Beatles’ White Album & Jay-Z’s Black Album) or Girl Talk’s insane mosaics of popular & classic songs would be impossible to make under the current IP regime… I mean, it’s easy to say as a hypothetical, but I’m seeing immediate issues with the logic of “ask for forgiveness rather than permission.” Like, if you’ve already released your song & it blew up super big, everyone has already heard it, you’ve already done the sampling & distribution, then what happens if the copyright holders say “No, we don’t give you permission. You can’t use the sample even for royalties, so you’re in violation of sampling without a license”? Could they potentially sue you for more for that violation than they could’ve gotten for royalties?.. Could they take everything you earned from the song? If not, what happens then? And even in a scenario where let’s say they don’t come down on you that hard, with the full force of IP lawyers & a punitive approach… If you already did it & it’s already been widely heard then you ultimately will have no choice but to accept whatever terms the copyright holders demand, because the alternative is that you refuse to pay for the licensing/royalties they demand, which means suddenly the song that made you that revenue is no longer yours, & then they could come after you in court (& if you’re an indie artist who is worried about this in the first place then you probably don’t have thousands for court/lawyer fees)… So if you don’t clear it in advance- if you “ask for forgiveness” like you’re encouraging- then doesn’t that leave you with zero leverage to negotiate from?.. At that point you NEED to get that sample cleared, regardless what they charge, so they have all the leverage & can basically just charge you whatever they want, & if it’s too much tor you to pay then that’s your problem. It seems like this approach just amounts to praying tor the good will & beneficence of corporations, but corporations have no good will or beneficence- they just have an institutional imperative to profit as much as they can. If they can profit more from screwing you over & taking everything in court than they can from accepting a smaller royalty/licensing fee then why would they ever do the latter? Maybe you can get away with it some of the time, especially if you’re dealing with an independent artist or a very small label who are just happy to see any royalties/popularization of their music (after all, the industry may act like clearing samples for other artists to use is a one-sidedly generous act the copyright holders do FOR us, but in reality sampling a song also is basically providing free advertising for the original & can even resurrect a long-forgotten song & make the copyright holder a lot of money just by boosting their own sales & streaming plays, irrespective of licensing fees or royalties paid by the sampler)… At any rate, if it’s already done & they demand an unreasonable fee then you just basically have to take a shitty deal or if you refuse probably get sued for everything you made from it… If you ask for permission BEFORE publishing a song that uses samples, on the other hand, then (a) it isn’t yet known exactly how much you’ll make off of it (so you might not get charged on the basis that it’s a smash hit with millions for the copyright holder to take the largest cut they can out of), but more importantly (b) you are in a position to negotiate, because you have leverage: if what they ask for is unreasonable & they’re unwilling to negotiate & meet you halfway, then you have the option of just *walking away*, NOT taking the deal & NOT publishing/making a song using those samples. Which means they have some incentive to work with you, because presumably they want to make royalties/licensing fees, & SOME would be preferable over NONE. That seems to me to be a huge, almost night-&-day difference in the dynamic of the negotiation. When asking for permission ahead of time the copyright holder’s options are “take what they can get in a somewhat fair business negotiation where both parties have something the other wants” vs “lose out on it all because you walk away & sample someone else instead…” Whereas if you ask for forgiveness after the song already blew up & is out there (can’t put the genie back in the bottle), with a known quantity of revenue having been earned off it, their options are “give you the chance to pay whatever they DEMAND from you as royalties/fees, while you just HAVE to accept because if you don’t get the license then you open yourself up to lawsuit & essentially stand to forfeit everything earned via your song,” or if they’re really nasty they could just “sue & take it all because you already risked that by publishing without clearing the sample.” Unless there’s something really big & game-changing I’m missing, it seems extremely sus & irresponsible to encourage artists (& particularly the younger, less experienced, more vulnerable indie artists who this video is directed towards, who probably can’t afford a legal team & would be devastated by a lawsuit or a really predatory, exploitative deal on clearing a sample) to engage in this practice which could so easily blow up in their face & ruin their lives/careers… It actually seems so odd & potentially hazardous to the artists being addressed that it makes me wonder if this guy or his company (he is literally himself a CEO) are invested in owning copyrights for various classic songs, & he’s intentionally steering people into a position where they’ll use his samples without asking prior, & then he can demand more or less whatever ridiculous rate he wants & if they refuse it will be them who get sued & lose out because in our capitalist economy, a CEO/corporation who owns the rights will always win out over some kid who just wanted to use a sample & got clapped for it. Not saying that is the case with this particular guy… I don’t know. Just saying that that is one explanation that would make sense of why he’d be giving advice that could end so badly for everyone involved EXCEPT the copyright holding record labels/investors who will get a lot more out of it if artists put themselves in such a vulnerable position.
You're not wrong. The only problem is this: If you, emerging artist, go to a label BEFORE you blow up, to negotiate your use of a sample of their Luther Vandross song, they'll laugh you out the door. The answer for emerging artists is pretty much always "no." So... by all means, try that route first. And if it's no, then you decide whether you a) remove the sample, or b) assume the risk of getting sued (and then hopefully negotiating a royalty rather than going into bankruptcy).
I have sampled the amen break. . How would this work if I have don’t have the sample cleared and my track is played on a major radio station? I expect the track to sell 1k, it will simply be played on a major radio station in the early morning, so it’s not at peak time
the amen break is kinda of a outlier, it's been sampled so much people just started letting people sample It with no consequences, it's been like 30 years and no one ever got sued for using oldschool breaks.
Hi guys, first of all thank you for your great tips especially for indie artists like me. I do have another question. I have my own production company and I wrote the music, arrangement and lyrics of my songs. I subscribed to "CD Baby" to provide me with a UIC and paid to have my CD reproduced. Why then would CD Baby tell RU-vid about licensing my music? I want to monetized my RU-vid posting of my own songs and CD Baby keeps popping up! Can you explain to me why? When it's muy own copyright and music? Thanks!!!!!
I believe there is an option (at least now) within the CD Baby process to elect whether or not they will distribute to CDBaby. Does CDBaby pop up by posting your music on RU-vid, or by crediting themselves as the distributor/publisher when you list your own music?
When you submit your music for distribution via CD Baby there is a free option to have them monetize your music on RU-vid. If CD Baby claims on your music pop up it's because someone selected that option. That means CD Baby is claiming your RU-vid ad revenues FOR you, and any royalties will appear in your account. They will also find other videos that use your music, and monetize them as well. My recommendation is that you let CD Baby do their job, since they are likely to find more of your music in videos than just on your own channel. However, if you insist on monetizing your own channel you can ask them to white label your channel. But note that your channel will not monetize unless you have 1,000 or more subscribers.
Why if this could benefit all parties and in the end great and classic content is made from it? Especially, if it isn’t against the law, and all parties are willing, why not?
You gotta know this video is 40% pointless. I lead up from a email just to hear “do what you want; its on” thats not helpful cuz ppl are already doin that. You pretty much just said keep doing what your doing...
I'm not sure everyone who could be doing that is already doing that - some artists may be too afraid to publish even on a small scale something with a tiny sample.
Huh? The video ended before you even got to the part of talking about "How Do Independent Artists Clear Samples?" HOW...? clap for clickbait you got one more view.
I agree but we live in a country where that's not true. We also have to think about someone else making the same thing and reaping more rewards than the original creator, give OP some legal ground
Imagine putting effort into a song that flopped and then a beatmaker and a rapper takes it, put some drum loops over and earns lots of money because they made it a hit ¿Don't you think is unfair? That why (even tho it's very difficult and not budget friendly) sample clearance exist
Wait, so the companies that sell the public the samples/ sounds/ notes and so on; that say in writing that you can do with the notes/sounds/loops/samples; anything you want with it as long as you don’t resale the sounds or sample/loop alone means what exactly? Also didn’t the original creators of said one note/4 notes sell said notes to these companies as is for the public to buy and use as they wish as long as they created it into their own music?
