Did Producer Timbaland Steal From the Demoscene?

gloom writes "In 2000 the Finnish demoscene musician Janne Suni (also known as 'Tempest') won the Oldskool Music Competition at the Assembly demoparty with his four-channel Amiga .MOD entitled 'Acid Jazzed Evening.' A Commodore 64 musician called 'grg' remade the song on the C64 (using the infamous SID soundchip); it is this that was stolen. The producer's name is Timbaland and he is one of the hottest names in American music these days. The track in question is called 'Do it' and it is featured on the Nelly Furtado album 'Loose' on the Geffen label. Getting nowhere with Geffen, the demoscene has now risen to the aid of Tempest, first by creating a stir at SomethingAwful (files downloadable from the forum), then at Digg.com, then on YouTube, with a video demonstrating the blatant ripoff. Being an online-posting musician myself — what rights do I have if this should ever happen to me, and what can be done to raise awareness about such things?"

Uh, okay...

[DrRevotron]

Why is this news? Everyone knows that hip-hop is unoriginal to start with.

You're unoriginal.

[Gray]

Name a type of music that has been more influential in the last 30 years..

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll give you between 10 and 30 years ago, but hip-hop has been 2% talent [wikipedia.org] and 98% wannabe posers [wikipedia.org] for the last decade.

Re:You're unoriginal.

[clambake]

You mistakenly put a link to Outkast in your 2% talent.

Re:You're unoriginal.

[DreamerFi]

No, that's correct. They only have 2% talent.

Re:You're unoriginal.

[urbanradar]

Name a type of music that has been more influential in the last 30 years.

How about, um, rock music? Rock music in all its form hasn't exactly been out of style and dead since early 1977.

Re:You're unoriginal.

[Anonymous Coward]

Name a type of music that has been more influential in the last 30 years..

Music from the Demoscene, apparently.

Re:You're unoriginal.

[HappySqurriel]

Name a type of music that has been more influential in the last 30 years..

Well ... Define "influential" ...

If you consider music sales [msn.com] Rock music is more popular than Rap, Hip-Hop, R&B and Urban combined. If you look at critical acclaim Rap music has only been receiving critical acclaim and awards (outside of specific genre awards) in the past 5 or so years.

And what does it matter if a musical style has been "influential" if the initial argument was that it was unoriginal? You can be very generic (and even steal other people's ideas) and still be "influential".

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

name a type of music that's beat hasn't changed in the last 30 years.

it was fine in the begining but using the same baseline from a disco song from 30 years ago only twisted and distorted and passing it off as "music" can't really be considered music.

I'm not denying that rappers can rap really well but I can't stand the "music" they use for it, don't get me started on emo lyrics or the scream metal stuff either (where they figure it's ok to just constently scream into the mic and pass it off as a tale

Re:

[Planesdragon]

Hmm...

0: Pop.
1: Metal.
2: Alternative
3: "Movie Classical"
4: Country
5: Disco
6: Rap.

There's six for you. "Hip-Hop" is just a bastard child of rap and pop. (Rap would be a higher on that list if i ranked on "size of influence.")

Re:You're unoriginal.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hip-Hop" is just a bastard child of rap and pop.

Wrong. Hip-hop is an all-encompassing culture, a movement started in New York City by inner city Hispanics and African Americans. Hip-hop traditionally consists of 4 "elements": DJ'ing (originally the backbone of hip-hop culture), Emceeing (rapping), Breakdancing, and Graffiti.

Originally, rap was the combination of an emcee rhyming over a DJ's beat. An emcee's job was originally to get the crowd more into the music the DJ was playing, hence the title (derived from MC, or Master of Ceremonies).

Through the late 90's, rap was simply called rap. Somewhere along the way, around the transition from the "jiggy era" to the Cash Money dominated southern sound of the mainstream, fans of underground rap music and conscious early 90's rap started referring to anything that was not mainstream as "hip-hop music", in an effort to differentiate "good" rap from "bad" rap"

Only recently have radio stations and music channels that typically play mainstream style rap referred to the music that they play as "hip-hop". This has prompted many people to revert to referring to the music they like as "rap" in backlash, to express their disappointment to the direction popular rap artists have taken musically (focusing more on simple beats and rhymes in efforts to appeal to pop crowds and club scenes).

Re:You're unoriginal.

[skorch]

Not to go too far OT, but Hip hop and Rap are actually the same thing as far as the actual pop-cultural relation to them are concerned. To be technical, Hip Hop refers to the entire culture, including things one might not generally think of such as fashion and speach. We used to refer to the four elements of hip hop: graffiti, breakdancing, DJing, and MCing (a.k.a. rapping), which in its early forms was actually subservient to DJing. Nowadays, MCing has moved overwhelmingly to the forefront, as the other elements have become more diluted, diversified, and hybridized (beatboxing could be seen as a more recently formalized and popularized hybrid of MCing and DJing, though it's generally been around for almost as long as hip hop itself). Now Hip Hop dance includes a lot more than just breakdancing, graffiti is much less popular (probably because it's not quite so marketable being illegal in nature).

Since Rap has taken such a dominant role, nowadays whenever someone says "hip hop" they're generally talking about Rap, but to refer to the two things as though they were different musical genres is a fallacy. People think that the subject matter of the songs determines the genre (rap being the sole property of gangster rappers, and all other forms falling under some other umbrella of "hip hop"). In truth, they're all hip hop, and rapping is what they all do. It's just a matter of what they rap about that determines the subgenre (gangster, etc.).

I find the people who try to argue that Hip Hop and Rap are different are generally people who don't listen to it much, or only listen to 3 or 4 artists and then declare themselves expert.

What you have listed there are not musical genres in order of their influence, but probably more in order of your own personal preference or encounterance (which is self-select no doubt, and very much anecdotal). You get outside of the US and Germany, and you'll find Metal drops off the list fairly quickly (and even within those countries, I doubt you'd ever find it that high on any list). Country barely has an influence the farther in any direction you go from midwestern or Southern America before you even hit the borders, much less outside the country. Disco, come on, really? And whatever "Movie Classical" is. But, you go anywhere in the world from as far back as the mid to early 90's, and hip hop was already ubiquitous, from the American brand that gets exported in abundance to the various local flavors that grew up on their own. We're talking from France to Japan to Zimbabwe here I might add.

But listing music in order of influence is also kind of fallacious, since all music is generally organic, and all genres have influenced and been influenced by others. If Disco has a great influence on modern hip hop, and hip hop is very popular, is it fair to say that Disco is the genre that's truly influential or hip hop itself? What if you could say the same for any other musical genre's influence on hip hop and vice-versa? Hip hop, at its very roots, is an assimilator, and has been growing due to its ability to absorb other musical genre's influences into itself seamlessly. From the earliest DJs mixing and remixing established Pop, Disco, and R&B tracks on turntables, to the modern mashups, this has always been a core element of Hip Hop.

Quite frankly, the competition of "my genre of choice is more popular/influential than yours" is a bit ridiculous, because it's not like popularity is the sole legitimizer of an art form. In most cases, it means the destruction of creativity in favor of formulaic nonsense and posers taking over and steering the future of the genre, which is what has happened to most of modern popular hip-hop. One should be happy while their genre or artist of choice remains in relative obscurity, because that is the place where they can enjoy the most creativity; even if it means other more popular and successful performers end up sampling or outright stealing their work.

Re:

[bubkus_jones]

80's rock, hair metal, grunge, to name a few.

Hell, I'd wager that Van Halen (both the band and Eddie Van Halen himself) have been at least as influencial to the music industry as most rap/hip-hop artists out today combined. They not only brought about the beginnings of rock and metal in the 80's, popularizing guitar heroes like no one before, but Eddie redefined how to play the guitar (yes, many, if not most of his popular techniques have been used before, but he popularized them like no other) and redefine

Re:

[Registered Coward v2]

Hell, I'd wager that Van Halen (both the band and Eddie Van Halen himself) have been at least as influencial to the music industry as most rap/hip-hop artists out today combined. They not only brought about the beginnings of rock and metal in the 80's, popularizing guitar heroes like no one before, but Eddie redefined how to play the guitar (yes, many, if not most of his popular techniques have been used before, but he popularized them like no other) and redefined the guitar itself (not many people before h

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Name a type of music that has been more influential in the last 30 years..

Rock, jazz, classical.. hell even techno! Oh.. sorry.. being Slashdot I thought you meant for folks with IQs above say 110-120 or so. If you're talking about the "mildly retarded" range (i.e. can install a fart cannnon muffler without killing himself approximately 60% of the time), then yes, hip hop.

My main gripe about all of this is this:

A Commodore 64 musician called 'grg' remade the song on the C64 (using the infamous SID soundchip

Re:

[metalhed77]

Leave it to the pasty white boys of Slashdot to state misinformed stereotypes relating to a culture they have very limited exposure to.

And yes, I am aware of the contradictions in that statement.

Re:Uh, okay...

[strider44]

You probably just don't have the right ear for it. If it was only the intro then I'd be dismissing it. It's not an exact copy and I'd bet you could find a few thousand pieces of music with those notes in there - it even sounded familiar to me! The melody is what is so interesting. It seriously sounds like the exact tune playing in the background - the notes are the same and even the drum beat (though it's a pretty common beat) seems to be the same.

I'd have to listen to proper high-quality versions of both to decide whether I think it's a true forgery though. If there's more of the original in the supposed forgery then that would be more evidence, but note how the tune in the intro could be easily derived from the melody - I would only put the intro being there as a minor evidence boost.

Re:

[Coryoth]

Am I the only one who is hearing the same 4 chords and the same basic beat? What exactly was stolen? Everyone was playing the same god-damn chords and the beat for the last 20 years.

I must admit I was a little curious after watching the Youtube version - but then the sound quality on that is so poor anyway. Going to the forum and listening to original mp3s it becomes a little more clear - what you should be listening for is in the background of the Furtado song; if you listen you can actually hear precisely

Re:Uh, okay...

[jacksonj04]

Yep - subtracting the .mod from the Furtado and taking out the drums on an EQ leaves very little backing. I love DSP.

Re:

[rblancarte]

What I don't understand is why this isn't going to court. I read the posts in SA by okkie and his

"He talked with a lawyer, he told me it would become time consuming and horrible. Record companies like Geffen have teams of lawyers and he would basically stand alone. Sad but true."

But a number of cases have happened like this, if it can be demonstrated at some reasonable level, I am sure that they could win. After all, there is a history of things like this in entertainment. I agree, it would be a long

Re:You're missing the point.

[Registered Coward v2]

Nelly Furtado's a freaking Portugese CANADIAN. Where did they get Australian from?? /Canadian

Most of us can barely find Canada on the map even though it's our 51st state; let alone figure out where some small island in the Pacific is located so we naturally assume anyone that speaks English and is from the Pacific is Australian. But at least we know Lisboa is Australa's capital; and if you look closely enough at a map of Europe you can find Australia nestled between germany and Hungary.
What I find odd is that her last name is Furtado - that doesn't sound very Australian since they speak English, not Spanish.

Obrigado for playing.

Piracy is okay if you are rich

[Anonymous Coward]

People please. There's a double-standard. Try to keep up with these things.

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich

[Goldberg's Pants]

There's a big difference between downloading a song, and ripping off someone elses work, passing it off as your own, and making money off it, which is what this fucker Timbaland has done. It's not piracy. Piracy is when you download Nelly Furtado's album.

Outright theft is when someones work is stolen and passed off as your own FOR PROFIT.

And it's also a great example of the disparity in the legal system. This guy has been completely ripped off, and basically can't afford to take it to court, because Geffen are richer than him.

One world, under a dollar, with justice for none except the corporations.

Stealing subconsciously?

[tepples]

There's a big difference between downloading a song, and ripping off someone elses work, passing it off as your own, and making money off it, which is what this fucker Timbaland has done.

True, sampling without permission outside a context of parody is wrong. But what if I steal and I don't know I'm stealing? How could George Harrison have caught himself and stopped himself from ripping off "He's So Fine", written by Ronald Mack and popularized by The Chiffons, when writing "My Sweet Lord"? See Cryptomnesia [wikipedia.org].

Re:

[Qzukk]

See Cryptomnesia

Then you say "oops, I goofed up", pay royalties if necessary, credit the orignal version, and life moves on. You probably take a credibility hit for a few weeks, then people decide your version was better anyway.

Credit != permission

[tepples]

Sampling without permission is fine, even outside a parody, as long as you give credit.

Giving credit does not remove the requirement to get permission; it just tells the world who is going to sue you.

If you don't give credit, you're lying about your song's authorship. If you do, you're just doing what every composer has done throughout history: building on the work of those who came before you.

Building on a public domain built by previous composers was possible until legislatures around the world extended copyright term to exceed the human life span.

Re:

[Snarfangel]

I find it interesting that Slashdotters, for some reason, draw the line at making money off of someone else's work. Stealing it is okay, but selling it afterward is crossing the line?

If I burn a CD from a friend, the owners lose one sale. If I then make multiple copies of the music and sell it on street corners, the owners lose far more

In this case, it is like pirating the album, then claiming all sales of that album are mine. How is actual creator supposed to sell his work -- or even give it away -- if the

Re:

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

If I burn a CD from a friend, the owners lose one sale.

If you burn a CD from a friend, the copyright holders lose one sale, ASSUMING you would otherwise have bought the CD. In aggregate, the cost to the copyright holder is far less than one sale per burned CD.

If you buy a counterfeit CD, then the formula is the same (the copyright holders lose the value of the sale assuming you would otherwise have bought the CD), but the cost to the copyright holder is at least what you paid for the counterfeit CD. This makes it a lot easier to show monetary damages in c

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich

[HappySqurriel]

I find it interesting that Slashdotters, for some reason, draw the line at making money off of someone else's work. Stealing it is okay, but selling it afterward is crossing the line?

There are two definitions of steal that seem appropriate to this discussion

1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
2. To present or use (someone else's words or ideas) as one's own.

Now the first definition is what you're applying to downloading, but a lot of people have problems calling 'Downloading' 'Stealing' because the owner of the music does not lose possession of the property and you (typically) have been given permission to obtain the music through other channels; you can tape music off of the radio for personal use and most albums will have (at least locally) been played on the radio when they're released.

The second definition is directly related to what has been claimed that timbaland has done.

There is room for debate on the download and no room for debate on the Timbaland situation.

Re:

[grahammm]

It is not selling it aftwerwards that is so bad, though it is not good. What is really bad is the plagiarism, copying someone else's work and then claiming it as your own.

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich

[Hal_Porter]

Actually Internet conventional wisdom is fairly unpredictable when it comes to copyright.

Case 1: Metallica vs the Internet

Metallica, a pasty white but decidedly non nerdy metal band complain about people stealing their music.

Slashdot: LOL, retards. Information wants to be free. Musicians should make money from live gigs + It's copyright infringement not stealing. Stealing is when you take something physical away from someone, like when a mugger took my iRiver full of Metallica songs.

Case 2: Someone uses GPL code in a non GPL product

Slashdot: OMG Stealing! Mailbomb them back to the stoneage!

Case 3: Pasty white Mac fans remix music, get sued

BoingBoing: Information wants to be free. DRM eats babies!

Case 4: A rich black man uses 4 chords from nerdy white guys

Slashdot: ZOMG! Stealing! Plagiarism!

I'd say that the background of the two parties is more important than any deep principle.

Disclaimer: Conventional Wisdom determined by reading comments until I got a headache, not a representative sample.

Re:

[shutdown -p now]

Anti-copyright, pro-copyleft.
Using others' works & crediting them is okay, plagiarising (using others' work and not crediting) is not.

Either way, information still wants to be free. It just includes information about the original authors.
So, what's so unpredictable and inconsistent here?

Re:

[OriginalArlen]

Years ago I used to work at a music publishing company as a tape copier / runner, one of the regular jobs was making "comparison tapes" - ten seconds of one of our tracks, ten seconds from a possible copyright-infringing tune. Anyone out there got New Order's "Republic" andMassive Attack's "Blue Lines"? Listen to the string breakdown at the end of "Special" -- around 4'10" (yes I'm checking!) Now go listen to "Unfinished Sympathy". Eerie, huh?

And how about Manic Street Preachers "Interiors" from the "Ever

Mod parent up.

[Mr2001]

The real problem here isn't that he built on someone else's work. That's just copying, and although copying without permission might be illegal in many cases, most of us realize it isn't unethical or immoral.

No, the real problem is that he didn't give credit. He's committing fraud against everyone who hears or buys the song, because he's claiming (at least implicitly) that he wrote the parts which he actually copied. Fraud is immoral, unethical, and illegal.

other ripoffs

[Anonymous Coward]

C'mon, he ripped off his name from a brand of outdoor clothing. Does ripping off a demoscene song surprise anyone?

he did?

[artifex2004]

It sounds to me like a combination of two characters from The Lion King. The farty warthog and the meerkat.

Pining for the Cjords

[stunt_penguin]

FFS keep this quiet!.... The RIAA (regular readers of /. I'm sure) will take notice and somehow manage to construct a legal argument meaning Timberlake gets to sue the Finnish artist for more than than the GDP of Finland. 7th Dimensional Copyright Theory or something. Wouldn't be the first time.

Great now they posted it on YouTube

[CrazyJim1]

How is the original author supposed to get any royalties when his works are posted all over the intarw3b.

Re:Great now they posted it on YouTube

[Almahtar]

That's the thing about the demo scene: it's not about royalties or profit, it's about the art. When someone rips that off and starts charging others for it (without so much as even giving you credit for all your work), it's completely against everything the work was originally composed for. It's like you get a gift for your kids and some jerk steals it from you, re-wraps it, and sells it to your brother as the perfect gift for his nieces/nephews.

Re:

[Almahtar]

The demo scene is soooo old. It springs from the 286 and earlier. At that point in time the only license that was imposed was the honor system, enforceable only by defamation. I have countless mods/s3ms/xms that have comments/descriptions griping about people that ripped samples or patterns, and that was all that they could do. Now rights are a much more legally enforced thing. Artists in the demo-scene haven't (in many circles) really buckled down and started choosing licenses because legal issues wer

Re:Great now they posted it on YouTube

[Aladrin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you only need a license if you plan to let others use your work in some way, shape or form? You are protected by Copyright law without a license and there are no exceptions. Licenses provide any general exceptions you want to give.

Demoscene people generally have a very small set of people they even want to hear their music. There's some live events and a few websites and that's it.

Re:

[CrazyJim1]

Its cool man, I understand you not getting the joke. After all I forgot the question mark. What I was getting at is that the RIAA trys to take down any video that violates their copywrights. I believe a famous Slashdotter once said,"If you have to explain the joke, its not that funny."

For hip hop,

[ack154]

It's not stealing. It's "sampling." At least that's how they usually justify it...

hottest name?

[skam240]

The producer's name is Timbaland and he is one of the hottest names in American music these days.

timbaland? who the hell is that?

Re:hottest name?

[Tester]

timbaland? who the hell is that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbaland [wikipedia.org]

Re:

[kharchenko]

For starters someone should update his Wikipedia to reflect this "incident" (it's protected for new and unregistered users).

Re:hottest name?

[Dirtside]

Seriously, it's two thousand goddamn seven, the "What is this X the article speaks of?" thing is OVER. You're on the fucking Internet, go to Google or Wikipedia and do five seconds of research. </rant>

Re:hottest name?

[titusjan]

Seriously, it's two thousand goddamn seven, the "What is this X the article speaks of?" thing is OVER. You're on the fucking Internet, go to Google or Wikipedia and do five seconds of research.
... and act like you're an expert on the matter, like the rest of us!

Excellent video

[joe_n_bloe]

I like them mixed together. Smoooooth.

Have you ever tried playing "The Halls of Montezuma" and "The Army Goes Rolling Along" together?

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Props after he's written the check maybe...

[TibbonZero]

Maybe you'd give him props if he asked beforehand, but afterwards like this... you'd do the same thing anyone would. Sue him and his label.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Will the little man get his finally?

[TibbonZero]

I really hope for once the little guy will get his, and this producer that samples shamelessly way too much (and makes some really crappy music when he's not), will get slammed.

I wonder if this will be a notice to the hip-hop community that, yes, you do need to clear your samples?

Re:

[i_should_be_working]

Rappers have usually cleared their samples since De La Soul got sued in the late eighties. On most CD covers there's some fine print stating where each sample came from, citing the original artist and song.

The only difference here is that he didn't actually take a direct recording, he "just" did a recording with his own instruments to make it sound just like the original. Which might be legal. After all, covers are legal.

But yeah, I'd like to see the original artist get some money from this too.

Is it April 1st already?

[stubear]

"...what rights do I have if this should ever happen to me, and what can be done to raise awareness about such things?"

None. Didn't you get the memo? Information wants to be free. Welcome to the world without copyright. Look at it another way, now more people have heard about Janne 'Tempest' Sunni so he'll be able to sell more records at his next show.

Re:Is it April 1st already?

[ZachPruckowski]

See, that would be an acceptable answer if the label Timbaland is signed to didn't go around suing people. But the major labels and their artists can't come out against piracy while coming worse infringements themselves.*

Re:

[Mr2001]

A world without copyright doesn't have to be a world with plagiarism. Copy freely, but give credit - to do otherwise, to claim that you wrote something that was actually written by someone else (or vice versa), is fraud.

I've read about this before

[Ant P.]

Basically it works this way: If you're involved in the demoscene, you don't have to worry about stealing because your colleagues will happily mob lynch thieves like this for you. If not then you'd better have a big fanbase.

Get Legal Representation...

[masdog]

A quick browse of the Wikipedia webpage on sampling shows a number of cases where artists have been sued for sampling, so the best thing is to get yourself a lawyer who will direct you towards a good license that allows you to share your work non-commercially. If someone violates that license, you can then get that lawyer to go after them. The history of sampling cases seems to show that artists will pay you off so they don't risk a trial.

And that finnish artist...she should bring Timbaland to court in Finland. She definitely has a case against him, especially since she has prior art to back up her case.

Re:

[strider44]

Why should he answer to any court in Finland?

Because assets of the publishing company can be seized by finnish authorities. And by "prior art" I think the GP poster meant "precedent".

Re:

[sweetooth]

Additionally, the album was likely sold by an entity in Finland as it did reach #13 on the charts there. Most likely the publishing company has a local presence that the assets can be taken from. Assuming of course that Finland has similar laws to the U.S. Of course he could always find a lawyer in the U.S. that would bring the suit in the U.S. where it would almost undoubtedly win. The downside to that is how much does the lawyer get? Probably 40-60%.

Send a DMCA notice

[Matt Perry]

Janne Suni needs to get a lawyer. I'm sure several DMCA notices sent to strategic places (Apple iTunes, Walmart, etc.) will halt the album sales until a royalty agreement can be reached.

Copyrights matter....

[Tester]

As long as they are ours.. That's basically the message that the Universal Music Group (of which Geffen Records is part) is sending. Its so typical of the corporate world (I'd say Corporate America, but I don't think its better elsewhere), they so much apply double standards when it comes to the law.. They are saying, we can steal from you, we can kill you, we can invade your country, we can infringe your copyrights, but if you dare to do one tenth of what we do, then its going to be terrible for you.

So any

Copyright is NOT there for the little guy

[cvd6262]

Haven't we learned from the Nemo lawsuit (and others) that copyright does not protect private citizens' creations. It only works for corporate-backed "creative" works.

(Yes, that was laden with sarcasm.)

This is new?

[Arivia]

This is new? [wikipedia.org]

Slashdot, help me know what to think!?!!

[glamslam]

Do we support this behavior (DJ Danger Mouse) or do we not (the example above)???

Re:

[RexRhino]

Slashdot, help me know what to think!?!!
Do we support this behavior (DJ Danger Mouse) or do we not (the example above)???

That is the great thing about Slashdot - your ideas don't need to be consistant - just knee jerk and reactionary, in order to be popular!

Re:Slashdot, help me know what to think!?!!

[ChaosDiscord]

You left out option three: actually understand the issues involved and stop trying to play "gotcha."

DJ Dangermouse may reuse other people's work in his own creations, but he credits his sources.

If the above is to be believed, Timbaland reused someone else's creations, but didn't credit his source. That's low. Really low. If it's true, Timbaland deserves the scorn he's getting.

He can sue, but I wouldn't expect a jackpot

[Anonymous Coward]

Being an online-posting musician myself -- what rights do I have if this should ever happen to me?

Don't worry. It won't.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Anyway, they're not going to get anywhere bitching to Geffen. No corporation is going to admit wrongdoing if they aren't forced to. Spreading the info on the web is good for their cause but really, "Tempest" has to get a good lawyer.

Keep in mind the only thing you can go after in the music industry is rights and roylaties. You won't get a big cash payout if an indie band steals your melody or worse, if another amateur slaps his name on your song. All you can do is make a fuss and possibly ruin their credibility. This would even go for a major label act with an album that doesn't sell-- if there's no money to be had there's not much you can do.

Now, Furtado's album will probably sell millions, so "Tempest" has a shot at getting the publishing rights for the song. But to get this resolved he will have to get a competent entertainment lawyer who will work on a (large) commision. Then, if they settle or he wins, he may be able to get the writer credit (or shared credit) on subsequent pressings of the song and all or part of the roylaties-- not on the album, but the song itself (so a fraction of the album.. a small fraction if it is not a hit.) And when I say roylaties, I'm not talking gross sales but instead what Timbaland's cut would have been.

Again, unless the song itself is a top-ten hit, I would not expect a big payday from this.

Here's the GRG mp3 for you to listen to

[zr-rifle]

http://www.limpninja.com/acidjazz/glenn_acidjazz.m p3 [limpninja.com]

Needless to say, I like GRG's version better.

Hello, RIAA... where are you?

[zappepcs]

I personally don't care two toilets full of crap how Nelly Furtado's career turns out, but I DO CARE what the RIAA et al do about this type of situation. Here they have the perfect opportunity to show the youth of the world that copying is NOT okay... OR... they can demonstrate first hand how it IS OK to copy people's work.

WWNFD? Can we get some bracelets printed up now? You only have to wear them when you're downloading MP3s off the Internet. Oh, please make them pink with ponies on them too.

Seriously, I h

They could care less

[TibbonZero]

This guy makes them money. Hell, they will probably sue the person who put the YouTube clip together for copyright infringement and breaking some anti-copying scheme on her shitty CD. The RIAA will never look out for the little guy, ever. Of course, you already knew that :)

Explain at me this:

[DynaSoar]

"In 2000 the Finnish demoscene musician Janne Suni (also known as 'Tempest') won the Oldskool Music Competition at the Assembly demoparty with his four-channel Amiga .MOD entitled 'Acid Jazzed Evening.' A Commodore 64 musician called 'grg' remade the song on the C64 (using the infamous SID soundchip); it is this that was stolen."

1. How is it that the latter was stolen, but the former wasn't?

2. How do we know the "evidence" wasn't fabricated?
2a. Are you sure I won't find something suspiciously similar in my

It's not sampling!

[joe_n_bloe]

Lifting and rearranging (i.e. "stealing") a tune is not sampling. If the Timbaland recording is the first published use of the song, and the use is unauthorized, then it is copyright infringement plain and simple. If it is not the first published use of the song, then there are two possibilities: a) the re-recording is a "cover" of the original, essentially similar to it, in which case compulsory licensing applies (and royalties are paid to the copyright holder at a rate defined by statute), or b) the re-recording is different enough that it is a derivative work, in which case compulsory licensing does not apply and once again it is simple copyright infringement. The copyright holder can force a halt to the infringement; what damages might be obtained in court, I don't know - the law isn't simple.

This is US law - I don't know what country's laws would actually apply in this case.

Metal Group "Dimmu Borgir" did this before

[zr-rifle]

Dimmu Borgir [wikipedia.org], a Norwegian Black Metal group, ripped a song from the Amiga game "Agony", composed by Tim Wright. The original was a beautiful piano piece [titan12.free.fr] that you could listen to in the title screen. The band stole the melody and used it in the song "Sorgens Kammer [altayre.free.fr]" ("The Chamber of Sorrow" in Norwegian).

They never acknowledged the ripoff, simply substituting the song with another one in the album. Pathetic.

This is common practice

[jambarama]

Sample to your hearts content without permission, if you have a winner, then you pay for the license. It looks like Timbaland just forgot the last part. If the song never gets released and popular, no harm no foul right? But if you have a winner you'll be able and happy to pay for the license, so it is a no brainer to sample without permission, until you want to release it. Of course this only seems to work for those with the ability to make money off a release (big record labels), independent musicians without the exposure and protection of a big label probably won't be able to pay off the copyright holder anyway.

But Tempest is right, there is no way this'd be worth it to fight. For example Talib Kweli recently violated Ben Kweller's copyright (or more likely his label's copyright) from the song "In Other Words". Kweller replied at the end episode 7 of his youtube show One Minute Pop Song. [youtube.com] If a fairly well known artist, Ben Kweller, can't fight it, someone like Tempest has pretty poor chances.

Home sampling is probably fair use, but certainly using a sample on a record is not. If Timbaland samples Tempest at home, I think that is great. If Timbaland wants to include it on an album, there has to be some kind of recourse for the little guy covering such obvious infringement. You know if Tempest released an album (even just on the internet) sampling Timbaland the RIAA would be all over it with Lawyers. Remember The Grey Album [wikipedia.org]?

Tracked music in Popcap games

[rwa2]

I've really enjoyed a lot of the Popcap games available for PDAs, especially since a lot of their optional background music seems eerily familiar from my downloaded mod files (many are available from Nectarine radio nowadays: http://www.demoscene.net/ [demoscene.net] )

OK, so it actually turns out that a lot of Future Crew's tracks were commissioned by Popcap:
http://www.futurecrew.org/skaven/music_tracker.htm l [futurecrew.org]

In any case, it's nice to see demoscene music used appropriately by folks with any decency.

Good God, YouTube

[Sarusa]

Boy, if you ever thought a large number of /. commenters were flat out stupid (as opposed to ones who just disagree with you), following that link to YouTube will certainly make you feel much better about /. commenters!

Relevant xkcd [xkcd.com]

In defence of Timbaland

[Kjellander]

Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, Janne Suni's attorney would certainly want you to believe that his client wrote "Acid Jazzed Evening" ten years ago. And they make a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, [approaches and softens] does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.

A note to non-native English speakers:

[uhlume]

A Commodore 64 musician called 'grg' remade the song on the C64 (using the infamous SID soundchip)...

Hint: 'infamous' != 'really famous'

Not the first time

[c=sixty4]

The trance song "Kernkaft 400" by Zombie Nation was a major hit in Europe in the late 90s, and quite obviously sampled from a Commodore 64 song. They were eventually forced to share writing credit with the original musician, David Whittaker, and pay a share of their royalties accordingly. I hope this ends up the same way.

Re:

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Maybe it costs nothing to make in the first place, then it should be free, but this is never the case. Costing nothing to copy doesn't justify the copying in itself. Those trying to earn a living making creative works would have a much harder time doing so if other people can simply copy their works and not contribute to the artist's livelihood.

There's also a difference between taking from historical works and taking contemporary works. That distinction is in the limited ownership of works. If Geffen, a

The law does not lump IP together

[tepples]

Because there's something called Intellectual Property.

United States law recognizes no such thing as "intellectual property". Federal law recognizes copyrights, and it recognizes patents, and it recognizes trademarks. Uniform state law recognizes trade secrets, and law in some states recognizes rights of publicity. The five areas of law have in common that they establish exclusive rights of some form, but these government-granted privileges are more different than similar and, according to many critics, not worthy to be grouped under the umbrella term "intelle [gnu.org]

Re:

[Planesdragon]

according to many critics, not worthy to be grouped under the umbrella term "intellectual property".

They are not deeds to land (real property), nor are they tangible or tradeable items (personal property), but rather artificial monopolies granted upon otherwise entirely reproducible things. Grouping them together makes exactly as much sense as grouping the right to pump oil from the ground with an installed air-conditioner (real property) or a certificate of stock with a turkey sandwich (personal property)

Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh

[joe_n_bloe]

You have no rights over your content once its been released.

I don't even know where to start with this.

Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh

[joe_n_bloe]

And before you go off and start flapping your gums anyway, i dont believe in copyright, patents or the concept of IP in general. As far as I'm concerned, once a 'object' is released into the world for consumption, you lose all rights to it and it belongs to 'the people'.
Fortunately, your beliefs and concerns don't matter.

Re:

[Overly Critical Guy]

And you would be completely, utterly wrong. Please, get out of the dorm room and get a job in the real world. I'm sure you wouldn't want to do a day's work of coding and then not have your boss pay you because "you lose all rights to anything you put out into the world."

Next.

Re:

[ScrewMaster]

Well, rights mean very little if you can't enforce them. And that really is the crux of the problem. The big music studios have the rights to their music (well, that of their captive artists, anyway.) What they've lost (and will never fully regain) is the ability to control that distribution.

Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh

[joe_n_bloe]

Yeah.

I've always drawn a distinction between "I'm making myself a copy because I can't get it any other way" and "It's mine, mine, all mine!"

Re:

[frogstar_robot]

Why? It's pretty much the partyline that Slashdotters put out in every piracy article. Not to troll, but come on.

Ummmm. No. You're trolling. The only thing you have left to do is say "I know I'll get modded down for this but....".

You are conflating two different things together to create a straw man. The Gnutella/Limewire/eMule type of copyright infringement is about getting a copy of something without paying for it. That issue is surely a mess and I'm not arguing any of its sides now. Limewiring

Re:

[Overly Critical Guy]

You do have rights over your content after it's been released.

Wow. Easiest counterargument ever. Any others I can knock out of the park while I'm here?

Re:Elvis estate sues RIAA

[Lorkki]

Please listen to what's behind the links before posting the first thing that comes to mind. It's not just a similarity - much less simple influence. It's an exact match all the way from the melody down to the bass and drum lines and the synth samples.

One hell of a coincidence if you ask me.

Re:

[Nasarius]

Did you even watch the video? The matches are just a little bit more complex than a three-chord progression. They are not "simple melodies" at all.

Re:

[Overly Critical Guy]

Did you even bother listening to the sound clips? This isn't a freakin' three-chord progression. It's the same tempo, same beat, same bass line, and same melody.

Re:

[x1n933k]

We like opinions here on Slash, but where do you get your 99.99% figure?

I agree. Life isn't fair. However, when a musician uses a sample (For example Moby, or Paul Oakenfold), they do have to list where the copyrighted sample comes from. Most of that stolen work you refer to is for hobbyist who don't make millions on a track, therefore you don't notice it as much. Timberland thought he could save a few pennies by putting his name on it because some Fin isn't going to make a racket. I guess he was wrong.

Mod parent down; troll

[urbanradar]

1) Probably. 2) Who cares?

If your music is so bad that Timbaland is producing a copy of it, you should take up mime or tiddlywinks as a means of creative expression.

Consider Nelly Furtado: Intelligent, talented, creative musician who has been turned into a shite-generating whore. All thanks to Timbaland.

The person who made the original song cares. People who support justice care. Whether you like Timbaland or not doesn't enter into it. This is a question of principle.

Maybe we should just rewrite copyright law. "It is illegal to use media without permission from the original author, that is, unless the one doing the plaguarising is someone whom Slashdot user swordgeek doesn't like."

Re:Best argument against buying music ever

[gbulmash]

"Second, if it is not immoral for producers to "steal," then why on earth should any consumer feel guilty for taking it back?"

Ummm... because two wrongs don't make a right?

- Greg

Re:Best argument against buying music ever

[Guppy06]

"Ummm... because two wrongs don't make a right?"

It's the "consumers" (i. e. "the people") who granted the music companies their copyrights anyway. If they're not going to abide by the terms of the agreement, why shouldn't the people be allowed to revoke their copyright privileges?

Re:Double moral in the /. community?

[nathanh]

Why I am not surprised to see that the very forum that applauded the release of the Grey Album by Danger Mouse now thinks that sampling and mixing is bad?

Tell me about it. And just last week I noticed that one Slashdotter supported the Democrats but another Slashdotter supported the Republicans. And the week before that I saw two Slashdotters who disagreed over climate change. It's as if Slashdotters have started having differences of opinion all of a sudden. I'm sure that's never happened before. About a year ago we all said and thought exactly the same things.

Re:

[mollymoo]

Something that I still haven't seen mentioned anywhere yet is that the producer is usually not the songwriter. Sometimes they are, but frequently they are not. Who is credited with writing the song? They're the ones you all should be going after. The producer usually deals with overseeing the recording, orchestration, mixing, etc. But a lot of times, the chord progression, melody, lyrics, etc are already mostly in place before the producer gets into the picture.

That certainly used to be the case - that'