Making and Detecting Illegal Music

Demona writes "Long-time music aficionado Dave Marsh has an article in the latest edition of Counterpunch entitled Sampler's Delight. Giving rave reviews to "Nothing to Fear", the latest in a long line of so-called illegal music, he also describes a "'major label waveform CD database,' which is capable of recognizing materials allegedly owned by the record label cartel." This database is allegedly why a UK pressing plant rejected the initial attempt at publishing "Nothing To Fear", which is comprised almost entirely of sampled material."

Comments

Re:How can you MAKE illegal music

[Niadh]

Make a song detailing how to decrypt dvds.

The company was Relatable

[yerricde]

While i believe there is/was at least one startup that was working to match music using a beats & tone analysis method that could match to songs that had been shifted or obscured in some way

That was Relatable.

i'm not sure this technology has ever been in real use.

Napster 10.x used it. MusicBrainz uses it.

11,000 albums heavily compressed to 160kbps still takes approximately 600gb

Relatable claims that its tech can identify songs down to 16 kbps.

Parody is only parody when...

[yerricde]

but is there not a certain degree of freedown allowable in reference parodies?

Under United States copyright law as interpreted by the courts, parody is only parody when the parody ridicules the original work itself. That's why The Wind Done Gone is legal but The Cat Not in the Hat isn't.

Good uses for a 'waveform database'

[beebware]

I know in the UK there is a service called Shazam which you call up with your mobile phone, point your phone at a 'music source' for around 15 seconds and then you get a text message/SMS back around 30 seconds later showing a) the artist name (handy for 'cover versions) and b) the track name. It also has the facility (if you register) to 'store' your requests on its website and give appropriate links to online music stores.
It seems to work quite alright as well, I tested it by playing 2 tracks at once out my speakers - it correctly identified one of them (I thought it'll fail complete), I've tried it via the radio on a bus - again success, admiteddly it failed in a very crowded and noisy nightclub - but it's still damn good (and resonable cheap) for identifying music.
The claim that they can recognise 1.5million different tracks from just a 15 second second sample - I don't know how they do it though, but I know *I'm* impressed by the technology!

Re:Good uses for a 'waveform database'

[BenHmm]

It's true - Shazam is really quite impressive. It's never failed on me, and I've tried it with some *really* obscure stuff. Of course, the next thing to do is to screenscrape the shazam personal page (or forward on the SMS), and link that to a p2p network, so you can shazam something, and when you get home your machine has downloaded it.

If you're in the UK, dial 2580 on your mobile...

Puff Daddy's real business is wholesale apparel

[Animats]

For Puff Daddy, the music thing is now a sideline. He's really an apparel designer, and a good one. See his new fall 2002 line, selling under the Sean John label. He's considered the most innovative designer in men's fashion right now. His stuff sells, too, unlike most other new ideas in menswear. It's not just runway fashion.

Re:I thought satire was protected.

[captaineo]

You are correct. Satire (using elements of a copyrighted work for comical/ludicrous effect) is not protected. Only parody (using elements of a copyrighted work to make fun of the work itself) is.

e.g. if a Saturday Night Live sketch featured actors dressed up as Star Wars characters in order to make fun of Star Wars, that would be fair use (parody). But if they were making fun of American politics (satire), they would need a license from Lucasfilm.

Of course this distinction is pretty ridiculous... It's the result of copyright holders successfully claiming that copyright is an absolute "property right" (which it is not).