Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Did Producer Timbaland Steal From the Demoscene?

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the not-about-the-money dept.

492

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?"

cancel ×

492 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Uh, okay... (4, Funny)

DrRevotron (994894) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598722)

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

You're unoriginal. (1, Insightful)

Gray (5042) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599062)

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

Re:You're unoriginal. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599144)

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. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599152)

Emo unfortunately.

Re:You're unoriginal. (4, Insightful)

urbanradar (1001140) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599172)

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. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599194)

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

Music from the Demoscene, apparently.

Re:You're unoriginal. (4, Insightful)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599196)

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:You're unoriginal. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599274)

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 talent).

Re:You're unoriginal. (2, Interesting)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599276)

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. (3, Insightful)

bubkus_jones (561139) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599278)

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 redefined the guitar itself (not many people before him put humbuckers in Strats, and he helped develop the Floyd Rose vibrato bridge)

The Original Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599142)

featuring the song an be seen here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZBv8Jqi-FzA [youtube.com]

I don't know, it sounds quite different to me.

Piracy is okay if you are rich (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598732)

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

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich (5, Insightful)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598814)

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.

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598940)

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?

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich (2, Insightful)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599312)

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 thief is ready to assert copyright?

Stealing subconsciously? (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598944)

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:Stealing subconsciously? (2, Insightful)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599190)

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.

Re:Stealing subconsciously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599246)

George Harrison was a great artist, but I do not think he needed to stop himself from ripping off that song. It happens. From a purely artistic perspective, I do not think it matters. Everyone borrows from everyone else. Very little is new or original. Much borrowing is unintentional and indeed subconscious. My writing style, though distinctly mine, is also influenced by the book I read last week, the magazine article I read earlier today, the phrasing employed by the announcer on the nightly news I am listening to right now. But when you get to copyright law, it does not care about artistic merit (though it should more than it does). It cares about copying. Harrison copied a distinctive and characteristic part of the earlier song in his new song. Artistically I have no problem with this, although I do see how copyright law does. I do not necessarily like the law, but it was properly applied in this case. Had it exonerated Harrison, subliminal though his copying was, enforcing copyright for music would be much less meaningful. Whether we should have copyright law at all might be a question worth asking?

Re:Piracy is okay if you are rich (1)

powerspike (729889) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599130)

this appears to be a problem with credit of the work, not with downloading of it. that is a different thing entirely

How about (-1, Flamebait)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598734)

You start by cutting a cheque to the estates of a thousand dead musicians who influenced you, hundreds of instrument designers who developed the tools, and society for giving you enough free time to create music.

If it costs nothing to copy, why shouldn't it be free?

Re:How about (1)

DrRevotron (994894) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598774)

Because there's something called Intellectual Property. I doubt you'd like it if I copied all your comments and posted them as my own unique thoughts. Writing songs that fit into a music style of a previous composer has nothing to do with blatantly copying somebody else's song without even giving them credit, let alone paying them any sort of royalty. And BTW, those hundreds of instrument designers get their money when you buy the instruments.

The law does not lump IP together (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599000)

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 "intellectual property" [gnu.org] . For the remainder of your post, I'll assume that you meant "copyright".

Writing songs that fit into a music style of a previous composer has nothing to do with blatantly copying somebody else's song without even giving them credit
So how do I know when I am doing one and when I am doing the other? In this case it is clear because it was a sample job, but cryptomnesia [wikipedia.org] leads to infringement as well.

Re:The law does not lump IP together (2, Informative)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599184)

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).

GNU doth protest too much. It's a perfectly valid term, and wasting time protesting common sense instead of explaining the differences between copyrights et al just makes you (or GNU) seem unhinged.

Re:How about (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598822)

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 member of an organization that demands respect for the works that they sell, then they would be hypocritical to not also give that respect to other people's works.

Niggers steal things... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598738)

news at 11.

If you mod this down you have no sense of humor.

Re:Niggers steal things... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598960)

Parent post gets modded down while the first post gets modded up.

Wow (0, Redundant)

DietCoke (139072) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598740)

That's amazing. No doubt that the Furtado track ripped them off!

None (-1, Flamebait)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598754)

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

Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (1)

joe_n_bloe (244407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598842)

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

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

Re:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (-1, Troll)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599028)

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

Re:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599166)

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 (1)

joe_n_bloe (244407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599188)

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:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (1, Insightful)

frogstar_robot (926792) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599198)

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 a freebie isn't what Timbaland has done. Timbaland is taking credit for the work of another. This is an attribution issue. It is not the same thing as downloading freebies from p2p. Arguments for and against that don't apply. This is something else entirely.

Just in case snarky arguments are being mustered, I'll explain it in simple terms: Even though Bob might download "Murder by Numbers" for free he wouldn't dream of saying he wrote it rather than Sting. In other news, Sting kicked Billy the Bar Singer's ass for doing just that the other day......

Re:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (0, Troll)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599270)

I'm not conflating anything together. This all boils down to trademarks and copyrights, which Slashdotters are normally against except when "one of their own" is the target of infringement--such as a demoscener, open source developers writing GPL code, and so forth. That was my point, and it still stands.

Re:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599298)

Eh? When do Slashdotters claim it is okay to not attribute the parts of your creation copied from another source to that other source? When do Slashdotters claim it is okay to sell copies you do not have permission to make?

Re:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (-1, Flamebait)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599044)

You can start by keeping your mouth shut. ( well, fingers off the keyboard, but im sure you are smart enough to understand what i meant ).

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'.

Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (1)

joe_n_bloe (244407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599138)

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:Ha ha ha ho ho ho hee hee hee eheheheheheh (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599300)

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.

other ripoffs (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598770)

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

he did? (1)

artifex2004 (766107) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599004)

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

Pining for the Cjords (3, Funny)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598782)

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.

Re:Pining for the Cjords (1)

DrRevotron (994894) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598802)

rawr. The evil Finns are time-travelers who come to the future to pirate hip-hop tracks! SUESUESUE!

Great now they posted it on YouTube (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598788)

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

Can you say "fair use"? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599024)

The work on YouTube is a criticism of the original works, which are not used in anything near their entirety. The author of the work on YouTube is not seeking to use this commercially. By my armchair analysis, a US court would consider this use a fair use rather than an infringement.

Re:Can you say "fair use"? (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599072)

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."

Thousands (1)

QueePWNzor (1044224) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598790)

Thousands of things are being ripped off every day. Frankly, there's no way to stop it and no way to prove it 99.99% of the time. Life just isn't fair, and nobody's trying to change it:) It's good that this guy was caught, but this is about as common as a somebody you know winning the $10,000,000 lottery. (And let's hope none of your friend use the "tax on stupidity") I love being the bearer of bad news. Try some forums if you really think you're being ripped off, but you'll be sued for slander before somebody like me reads your post:)

Re:Thousands (2, Informative)

x1n933k (966581) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599074)

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.

[J]

For hip hop, (2, Funny)

ack154 (591432) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598804)

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

Re:For hip hop, (1)

DrRevotron (994894) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598868)

Sampling (/-p(&-)li[ng]/)
Function: Transitive Verb
1: See "Kanye West"

Re:For hip hop, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598884)

I thought they still licenced the music sampled - its just that in most cases the company producing their music already owned everything sampled?

hottest name? (2, Insightful)

skam240 (789197) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598818)

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? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599018)

He's that little black midget who hangs around in Nelly Furtado's videos.

Re:hottest name? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599056)

I just remember Timbaland [wikipedia.org] as that guy who covered the Spider-Man theme ("Here We Come").

Re:hottest name? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599084)

The fact that you even ask that question shows you know absolutely nothing about the current music scene. Go back to your Journey and REO Speedwagon.

TNB (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598830)

TYPICAL NEGRO BEHAVIOR

Looting, stealing, raping.. the typical behavior of Blacks in America. Oh wait Happy Martin Luther King Jr Day!

Pop pop gunshot. Muh dick! These "musicians" or so-called rappers often take parts of a song and move the words around to call it their own. I wonder where they get that from?
Look at Koonye West aka Kanye West. He "borrowed" err stole, the idea for his "Touch The Sky" video from Evil Kanevil's infamous Canyon jump. When the video didn't win Video of the Year, West chimped out shouting "It costed a million dollars, had Pamela Anderson in it, and had me jumping over a canyon". This coming from the same guy who said George Bush doesn't care about Black people. Of course GWB doesn't care about black people. If he did, he would give every one in the USA at birth an infinate supply of bulletproof vests, bulletproof helmets (lol Fitty Scents getting shot in the face) and groin protection (2pac got shot in his nuts, lol).

Martin Luther King, Jr (often called Martin Looter Koon, Jr) was a plagarist, a communist and a womanizer. King plagarized much of his "I Have A Dream" speech.

Someone give Timbaland a huge slice of watermelon and a bucket of KFC chicken for a job well done! He's sitting back, smoking crack, and laughing his ass off about his major "accomplishment".

The truth of MLK can be found at www.martinlutherking.org

Re:TNB (2, Informative)

na641 (964251) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599048)

These "musicians" or so-called rappers often take parts of a song and move the words around to call it their own.

Hate to break it to you but Timbaland is a producer.

"if this should ever happen to me" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598848)

Tsk, tsk, you should have used DRM.

- RIAA Representative

Two answers (-1, Troll)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598854)

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.

Elvis estate sues RIAA (0, Troll)

autophile (640621) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598858)

In other news, the estate of Elvis is reportedly suing all artists signed with RIAA labels due to their use of the "I-IV-V" progression.

I think that there are enough simple melodies polluting the "root melodyspace" to start producing spurious similarities.

--Rob

Re:Elvis estate sues RIAA (5, Informative)

Lorkki (863577) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599042)

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:Elvis estate sues RIAA (1)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599078)

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:Elvis estate sues RIAA (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599218)

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.

Best argument against buying music ever (1, Interesting)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598874)

Thank you Timbaland, this is a really great argument against buying music. I'll make good use of it to convice the few that I know that still buy music occasionally. First, commerical music is obviously crap since they have to "steal" their music. Second, if it is not immoral for producers to "steal," then why on earth should any consumer feel guilty for taking it back?

Excellent video (1)

joe_n_bloe (244407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598876)

I like them mixed together. Smoooooth.

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

Re:Excellent video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599050)

I like them mixed together. Smoooooth.

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


Boring! What you really want to do is to sing the Marine Hymn (Halls of Montezuma) to the tune of "Oh, My Darling Clementine." Just hum a few bars and see how well it fits.

Song Writers Take Note (1)

Airon (108830) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598896)

I will be very interested to see how this pans out.

The new production even contains chip-music instruments. The other way round it would seem obvious indeed, but will anyone place value in a chip tune by an internationally unknown musician, just because it sounds so different and has no vocals ?

So when folks here ask themselves : "The chip tune is so different to the Furtado track, so why should the Finnish guy complain?" , ask yourself if you'd be saying the same thing about someone making money off a highly recognizable music of an Elton John or Green Day song. Fame means nothing in copyright law.

this isn't just "sampling" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598912)

it's stealing. it's not like he took a drumloop, or a simple hook - he lifted the entire song and layered some vocals and extra production on top of it. it's criminal - if not legally, certainly artistically. i just lost all respect for him. he should have at least asked for permission.

think about the time that "the police" were used in that terrible hip-hop track a few years ago. whoever made it (i could care less) probably had to pay serious money for the rights. the only reason they didn't talk this time is because the original song came from an "amateur" musician.

this is disgusting.

this is rubbish (-1, Offtopic)

dogmatrix (845796) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598914)

You guys should focus more on the Intel(TM) quad-core(TM) instead ,which is like the Gilette 5 blades thingie... I do expect 16 an 32 core to be on the desktop as soon as 9 and 12 blade Gilette Sensors(TM) will be available. Who cares about plagiarism im music ? Sampling is the name of the game...isn't it ?

You should have contacted Timbaland (2, Interesting)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598916)

From the Wikipedia: In the early years, demos had a strong connection with software cracking. When a cracked program was started, the cracker or his team would take credit via an increasingly impressive-looking graphical introduction called a "crack intro". Later, the making of intros and standalone demos evolved into a new subculture independent of the software piracy scene.

IMO this is a good appropriation of the material in the spirit of "rhyming and stealing" that both hip-hop and the demo scene spawn from. Yes, the demo scene artist got screwed over. But, if Timabland is scouring the internet for .SID files I'm pretty sure it would not have been unfeasible to contact him directly and ask what's up? You'd be surprised how far up the chain you can get using myspace [myspace.com] .

As an underground musician myself, I would have taken it as props. I don't know what exactly the artist is looking for here? Royalties? Respect? At least now he has 15 minutes of fame?

what the artist is looking for... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599154)

Have all Nelly Furtado CDs recalled and melted down, improving the average quality of music on the radio :)

Re:what the artist is looking for... (1)

conner_bw (120497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599262)

In that case, I support the initiative!

Seriously though, if the rational behind the call to attention is to show that the free music scene trumps the unnecessary and redundant commercial music scene, then go for it!

If it's to collect a check on a song that would not have made money otherwise, I can't say I care.

Props after he's written the check maybe... (1)

TibbonZero (571809) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599292)

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.

producer != writer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598918)

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.

Will the little man get his finally? (1)

TibbonZero (571809) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598924)

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:Will the little man get his finally? (1)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599328)

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? (1)

stubear (130454) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598930)

"...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? (4, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599200)

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:Is it April 1st already? (1)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599332)

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 (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598936)

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.

lol SA is down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598968)

Guess Lowtax needs to make Adbot mandatory to raise some bandwidth revenue!

Get Legal Representation... (3, Insightful)

masdog (794316) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598974)

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.

What (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598980)

I just saw the video on Youtube. Anyone who has taken an Intro to DSP course knows that their comparison is absolutely worthless -- rather than show me an amplitude plot, show me a spectrum... then visually a more accurate comparison might be made. This is basic fact.

Since the source of this is the SomethingAwful, I'm guessing that this is a poor attempt at a troll or the general case of pluralistic ignorance communal reinforcement that runs rampant in that community. Nothing worthwhile to see here folks, move along.

Send a DMCA notice (1)

Matt Perry (793115) | more than 7 years ago | (#17598984)

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.

fuck whitey! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598986)

as long as we're just stealing from the white man it's not really stealing just like racism in black communities ain't really racism but justice when we rape the white bitches.

How is this any different, from, say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17598988)

Tricky robbing Portishead blind ("Glory Box") in his track "Hell Is Around the Corner"? This sort of thing goes on all the time within the music industry, and nobody bats an eye at it.

Copyrights matter.... (1)

Tester (591) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599036)

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 anyways, feel free to use your favorite P2P network to download UMG's works, since they don't think copyright matter. That said, I couldn't agree more with them, the whole copyright thing is dumb and should be abolished.

In BassAckwards America... (1)

violent.ed (656912) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599054)

Finally!! In America an Mp3 Creator Sues RIAA! ... (wishful thinking)

Slashdot effect and irresponsible editors (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599068)

Once again slashdot editors point monster traffic at someone else's machine, taking it down. Way to go fags.

Coincidence? (1)

Guitarhero1000 (1007633) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599088)

Now days listening to all the big label music out there, I have come to find that a lot of song sound almost identical to me. Almost every *New* rock bands out there constantly sing in that same flat mundane voice, use the same effects and techniques on their instruments. I constantly get bands confused with others. Don't even ask me about techno, all that stuff sounds the same to me with just little variances in the beats/sounds. After reviewing the youtube video I can honestly say that this may be just a coincidence that the song matches with the Nelly Furtado one. Let's face it, most big name singers don't even write their own words to their songs anymore. This could have been a case that the producer stumbled across a good beat *Possibly the stolen one* and plugged it into a computer, copied the midi/mod sequence, ran it through a nice 5 thousand dollar Korg keyboard, tweaked the sounds and said "hey look! It's done!" But, as said before in other post's, there isn't going to be any or enough evidence for them to say that this was a true ripoff. The sounds are distinctly different, and the original one had no words to it. If it was truly stolen I feel sorry for Mr. Timberland, a producer with absolutely no talent resorting to stealing from free lance musicians for a quick buck.

Copyright is NOT there for the little guy (1)

cvd6262 (180823) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599132)

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? (2, Interesting)

Arivia (783328) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599146)

This is new? [wikipedia.org]

Slashdot, help me know what to think!?!! (4, Insightful)

glamslam (535995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599148)

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

He can sue, but I wouldn't expect a jackpot (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599160)

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.

not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17599284)

I remember a few years ago some rock band stole a bass line from an old pc game. I can't remember the band since I'm not that big into rock music but I clearly remember it from the game Dark Sun: Shattered Lands on pc. I remember when I was playing the game in the area with that music thinking "damn that is a funky bass line!" and then ten years or so later hearing some rock band use it in a song that got regular radio play thinking what a ripoff.

So I think stealing obscure game music and integrating it into other genres of popular music is not new. I'm pretty this has happened other times...

Oh yes...jermaine dupri using a NES metriod music and sound effect sample to make the beat in the song "On some real" by Daz. The jd beat on that track could be considered a legitimate sample usage and "fair use" I mean it's a creative use of sampling to make a new beat and not just lifting the whole bass line but...

That rock one was a real straight ripoff, can't remember who it was though since I mostly listen to rap and electro...

Hello, RIAA... where are you? (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599288)

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 hope the RIAA backs up all their BS by going after this guy for giving their whole effort a black eye if nothing else. They should make him apologize to the world, and give away free NF MP3 downloads, or divert CD sales profits to the original musician.

Does anyone else out there have examples of artists ripping off smaller unknown artists?

They could care less (1)

TibbonZero (571809) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599330)

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: (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 7 years ago | (#17599294)

"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 obviously pre-2000 collection of MODs on my Apple IIgs? I still have it and them, and it still works.

3. According to the Red Hot Chili Peppers, "Givitaway givitaway givitaway givitaway now", so why do they still charge money for their albums and concert tickets? Word.

4. Can I get sued for #3? Hell yes. Will it have any merit? Depends on how good the attorneys they can afford to buy with their profits are. Two words. Sad to say, but true.

d00d, Bono didn't start giving it away until after he'd made such a pile that he could afford to, and even then he used what he made to get people to give him more so he could give that away. Therein lies his genius.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?