[rumori] The Sample Clearance Fund: A proposal

Steev [rumori] The Sample Clearance Fund: A proposal
Wed, 26 Aug 1998 11:08:32 -0700 (PDT) (00904183712, Pine.LNX.4.02.9808261101180.23062-100000ATflotsam.detritus.net)

On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Nicola Battista wrote:


>At 08.40 26/08/98 -0700, you wrote:
>I don't think an agency should decide. Infact, YOU should decide by
>assigning that percentage to the Fund, in my scheme... you think you have
>this track and have used 20 RECOGNIZABLE samples from tracks assigned to
>the Fund, so you assign a percentage to the Fund. It's not the "office"
>"agency" or whatever that decides.
>For me, Puff daddy is trashy. For someone else, it could be high art. So I
>would never mean to assign such a task to an Agency. Hope I explained my
>thoughts...

i'm sorry but i just think this is ridiculous. you'renever going to
get every single creator of every recorded sound in the universe to
sign up with this Fund! And it won't work unless everyone is a part of
it. or am i missing something?


>>Just for fun I'll just mention a 2 example problem pieces that such a
>>mythical agency might have trouble with:
>>
>>"Rebel Without a Pause (whipped cream mix)" by the Evolution Control
>>Committee
>>
>>"Pretender" by John Oswald
>
>I'm afraid I don't know these tracks (but I'm trying to find more Oswald

omigod.
If anyone on this list hasnt heard these tracks, run, don't walk, to
http://detritus.net/archive/plunderphonic and
http://detritus.net/ecc/gunderphonic
and listen to them NOW, before reading or writing another word.

thank you.


>stuff so maybe I will have at least one of them soon). Anyway: is the
>original clearly recognizable (no matter if the original bit is 1 sec or 2
>mins long)? If so, for me they ARE "musically dependent" from their

no. that's not what musically dependant means. Just recognizability is
not the criterion.


>The Timelords/KLF's Manual says that they didnt play a signle note on
>Doctorin the Tardis, yet they felt it as *their* original work, as if they
>had been closed for months in a studio trying to create a masterpiece from
>scratch... so -again- I'm not questioning "originality". Even Puff Daddy
>may have "originality" ;) in a certain sense as he made a rap/soul version
>of a Police track and no one before had done that.

exactly. originality, not uniqueness. a distinction made in Retrofuturism
magazine years ago, I believe.


>>Mark G. pay for his use of Herb Alpert and Public Enemy? Should Oswald pay
>>for using Dolly Parton?
>>
>>I say, no. Someone else is going to say yes.
>
>I'd say MAYBE. See above..

YOU go see those urls, ASAP!! There's no point talking about this stuff
if we don't have a common point of reference. You could be talking about
C&C Music Factory and I could be talking about Christian Marclay and we could never ever agree, if we havent each heard the examples we're talking
about.

smh

Steev Hise, Technical Thug
steevAThise.org http://www.cyborganic.com/people/steev recycled art site: http://www.detritus.net -----------------------------------------------------------------
"This island is big enough for every castaway But most of us are looking round
For someone else to blame." -Chumbawamba, 'Scapegoat'
-----------------------------------------------------------------

________________________
http://detritus.net