[Rumori] beasties win sampling suit

[matt davignon]

>From what I can read on a quick search/refresher:

The NWA case regarded sampling a George Clinton recording without paying to 
use the recording.

In the Beastie Boys case, the group secured the license to use the recording 
from the record label, but did not obtain a license for the composition 
itself.

So... the findings are actually compatible with each other. The NWA thing is 
really alarming to me though. I thought I was in pretty safe water because 
most of the samples I use are unrecognizeable or heavily altered. Now I'm 
only in safe water because nobody gives a crap about my music. :-)

Matt Davignon

>From: stAllio! the original wanksta <stalliongsta at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: "Detritus discussion list." <rumori at detritus.net>
>To: snuggles at sensoryresearch.com, rumori at detritus.net
>Subject: [Rumori] beasties win sampling suit
>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:24:47 -0800 (PST)
>
>this decision would appear to be the exact opposite of the nwa case
>from a few months ago, but i haven't yet found an article with a
>detailed enough analysis to be sure...
>
>http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/You-gotta-fight-for-your-right-to-sample/2004/11/10/1100021883656.html
>