Slashdot Mirror
Eminem Sues Apple for Sampling his Samples
EvanKai writes "To celebrate Grey Tuesday, Eminem sues Apple to show his support for hiphop and sampling. CBS MarketWatch is reporting
that 'Rapper Eminem's music publisher is suing Apple Computer Inc., claiming the company used one of the hip-hop superstar's songs in a television advertisement without permission. Eight Mile Style filed the copyright infringement suit late last week against Apple, Viacom Inc., its MTV subsidiary and the TBWA/Chiat/Day advertising agency.' While the ad in question no longer appears, several similar ads can be found here. I can't believe Chiat Day failed to clear the use of these songs with Pink, Mariah Carey, and The Who... or whatever major label actually owns the rights."
Let's go slaughter it... who cares if it would've produced more for us in the longrun.
Dont artists sample each others music freely anyway?
Well, from the sound of Eminem's going rate ($10million plus) it might be cheaper to just use the songs and then pay a smaller settlement fee. Just maybe...
The guitars sound good, now give me about 10db more on the cow bell.
Who cares about that dickhead anyway? I'm surprised they wanted to sample him in the first place...
Eminem is sooooo worried about being taken seriously as a artist isn't he?
First Weird Al and now Apple... I hope no one ever buys that loser's albums ever again and he can go back to being poor white trash again.
Is that it was a totally original song (from 8-Mile), so there's nothing ironic at all...
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
My name is what! My name is who!
Damn now im getting sued for $10,000,000!!!!
Do artists care that they are getting free advertisement for their music? Artists used to pay radio stations to promote their music on the air. Now artists are demanding radio stations to pay THEM to play their music. I thought RIAA had something up their asses...
I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
Also has a story on this. The kicker is it all rhymes!
-EB
Do you ever walk alone like a drifter in the dark?
If you RTFA then you'll find that Apple didn't "sample" the song at all. Jeez. Can we get some standards here? The entire "story" here is that hip hop artists sample and then one is complaining about sampling, except that he isn't...
John.
The most popular "legal" music download service is now taking heat for illegal use of music.
Do the artists have any say in any of this sort of thing? For instance, is it likely Eminem told his people to go after Apple or are his people going after Apple regardless if he likes it or not?
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
Oh dear! Somone is going to get roasted over this one. How could somone have overlooked something as simple as clearing the music rights? Then again, Apple has been known to be a little silly when it comes to things like this, look at the previous names for dev versions of the Mac OS, Copland, Gershwin, and Mozart. I'm pretty darn sure the Mozart foundation (or whatever it's called) actually did sue Apple for use of the name without approval.
The ad agency bought the song from iTunes for $1 and assumed they could use them.
His label, 8 Mile Style, owned by him, arranged for him to be one of the first exclusive artist on the iTMS. Now the label is suing Apple for a song that wasn't legally copyrighted until long after that commercial was run on MTV. Its a ploy to get his name in the papers and keep it there. Ya know he bitches about people not leaving him alone and boycotting him.. then goes and does this over something so little.. ironic.
Is it just me, or is this not a big deal? To me this doesn't indicate that Eminem has any problem with other artists sampling his music, but with it being used in commercials without permission. I mean, come on, just because this is Apple and we all love iTunes and the iPod doesn't make it right. Many people view artists allowing their music to be used in commercials as "selling out", and in Eminem's case, I could see this being even more of an issue than normal.
Ah, the classic SCO strategy...
It's a good thing that eminem is suing Apple for the lost revenue. Maybe now he can buy that cute little Miata that he's had his eye on...
if what Eminem claimed is true, ie Apply used one of the hip- hop superstar's songs in a television advertisement without permission, then it's a legitimate action isn't it?
now we're asking why a super-rich like Eminem bothers to stop free advertising. however we must think of a bigger picture where lesser-known artists are not getting a fair share and have no where to go.
It was a 10 year old girl singing the song (acapella) for like 8 or 10 seconds. Hardly a sample or anything.
:(
However, laws are laws, as stupid as some of them may be. Apple should have known better.
Thanks to that 10 year old girl, he won't be able to buy his own gold-plated shark tank this year.
I would like to remind Mr Eminem that under his "work for hire" contract with his publisher he is not the author of the Eight Mile soundtrack and holds no copyright to it.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
Maybe Apple has some fine print in their iTunes Artist Agreement that states that if an artist places his song(s) on iTunes that apple will be able to use them in any manner that they wish. That would be smart if they did that.
The guitars sound good, now give me about 10db more on the cow bell.
What a hypocrite.
This Eminem (TM) guy's case is probably on shakey ground.
Well, duh, that's probably why they didn't hire him to endorse it, and instead paid someone else to sing a portion of the song indicating the kind of things that someone might expect to find on iTunes Music Store. Apple probably doesn't give a damn if Eminem endorses the service or not; they just want to inform prospective customers about what kind of music is available on it, not of Eminem's paid opinion of the service.i guess eminem will soon be following in the footsteps of other bands like Metallica with going after anyone they can. dont quite have enough money yet, probably wont have enough after the lawsuit, but at least then other people wont have their money.
30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
Score:5, Troll
The song was rapped by a 10-year old in a commercial. If it was hummed, would it count? This is the state of the music industry today, isn't it? An artist tries to get everybody singing their song and then sues anybody singing their song. Maybe the RIAA and SCO are not so different.
Stay tuned for new sig...
Can't remember where I saw it on the web, but one of the articles noted that the copyright for the song wasn't registered until months after the commercials began airing. Not sure whether that really makes any difference in the case, though.
I'm sueing Apple for using my silhouette!
What the fuck is wrong with this guy? In the commercial it was just some gal incompetently singing a capella for a few seconds. What the fuck? Is singing someone's song in a public medium suddenly a crime? If so, when did this situation, arise? Eminem is full of shit anyway; I'm pretty sure he already got sued for stealing someone else's material in the past. He's not even a serious artist, no matter how much he'd like to think so. He has a shitty alias and he makes shitty music. Fuck him.
Why didn't Van Halen sue Tone Loc? (U2 can sue him too, actually...)
Why hasn't James Brown sued any of the rap acts that have sampled his stuff? (and many, many, many hip hop songs have ripped off his stuff)
Why didn't the Jimi Hendrix estate sue the now defunct WCW (since I don't think Time Warner owns the Hendrix copyrights)? The nWo theme was nothing but a mishmash of Jimi Hendrix riffs, after all..
Did Sir Mix-A-Lot pay royalties to Black Sabbath for his rip-off of 'Iron Man'?
Where would hip hop be without ripping off other artists? At least if credit was given the way the classical composers did it (saying, hey, this melody is a derivative of "___" by "___"), I think it would be less of a big deal.
Now, Apple should have licensed the use of these songs - but isn't it just a bit hypocritical of Eminem to sue apple when the biggest rip-offs of music has been several hip-hop artists?
Someone who's more familiar with Eminem's music can answer this - but who has Eminem ripped off?
If it's a "sample" then how could Apple get in trouble for using it? The only way I can think of is for them making money on his behalf... but I guess that's why he shouldn't be giving away "samples" of his work. Samples are free after all. If I took a sample of one of those AOL disks and promoted my CD selling business... I doubt I could get in trouble as long as AOL made money from the CDs I sold that are theres. (Same way Apple's iTunes sells Eminem's tracks and money goes back to him) It's the same thing as buying his album.
Give it a rest, Slim Shady.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
Apple needed permission from the publisher - not the label who released the album.
In case you don't know - the publisher is whomever owns the copyright to the music and the words. The label owns the sound copyright. Two different things
Since the commercial (I haven't seen it) re-recorded the song the sound copyright holder doesn't need to be involved, but they needed a license from the publisher (a sync license) to broadcast the commercial.
I guess guns will be replaced by equally potent copyright lawyers in future rap. I would like to see a gang war with that!
As much as I can't stand his music, I was about to side with him - I think I'd be thrilled to have my music in a commercial but not if it was for something I didn't want to endorse. One statement in the article leans toward this feeling, but then veers off to explain how much money it would cost to have him endorse their product. Ugh. Always about the damn money I guess.
One of the most notorious examples of sampling irony is the Negativland/Coca-Cola connection. The California-based band Negativland, copyright infringers of the highest reverence, "illegally" sampled a 1966 religious record and calls their version of the song "Michael Jackson". Samplist Fatboy Slim decides to sample Negativland's song, licenses the Negativland version of the religious sample from SST records, and also calls the song "Michael Jackson." After Fatboy's ensuing popularity, creative advertising executives decide to license Fatboy Slim's song for a Coca-Cola television commercial. Result: Coca-Cola unwittingly engages in copyright infringement. Negativland, whose calling is to debase advertising on all levels, find their music selling soft drinks. Fatboy Slim deposits a huge check in his bank account.
Negativland writes: "The track 'Michael Jackson' from this Fatboy Slim CD ['Better Living Through Chemistry' (Astralwerks) 1998] samples from the Negativland track 'Michael Jackson' from our 1987 release 'Escape From Noise' on SST Records.
"Stupidly, Fatboy Slim went to SST Records to get permission to use this sample. SST charged him $1000, which they are keeping all for themselves, of course. Besides the fact that Fatboy could have kept his $1000 and taken the sample from us without permission and we wouldn't have cared, the Negativland sample he used was itself appropriated by us without permission from a religious flexi-disc originally issued in 1966. [In fact, a Negativland member LITERALLY stole this record from the basement of a church in Concord CA.]
The article I sampled this from is here
Not that I personally care if megamillion dollar rapper X is sueing large company Y about permission of use.
But, aren't they allowed to use small snippets of music in order to *gasp* sell music? Example: the lousey 30 second clips found on most online CD stores... they don't clear each one of those do they?! Granted, I imagine before a commercial airs they usually sort this out, but I gotta think there was some legalese somewhere in whatever contract itunes has with 8mile publishing to allow for this type of use (otherwise sack the legal department)
*shrug*
e.
Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
Apple could argue that since the song was song acopella it is protected, as all acopella is, under the first amendment as parody. I don't know how well that would fly though.
Modular Redundancy--Because 4 out of 5 Nodes agree
I'm going to delete all 103 eminem tracks off my hard disk.
Take That Marshal!
Dr. Dre hires musicians to play baselines differently so that it will fit the legal requirements and he will not be required to pay royalties to the person he is "sampling".
If he copies a baseline verbatim (or actually samples their record), he pays them a royalty.
This isn't his decision, this is the decision made by the politicians that made the laws so restrictive. Paul's Boutique could never be made today, because the sampling is too extensive and it would be impossible for the record company to clear the record legally.
Advertisers must license every song that they use in their advertisements. Unlike "sampling," advertising has always worked this way, afaik. I see very little wrong with The Rolling Stones charging Billy G so many millions to use "Start Me Up."
So, go white boy go white boy go white boy go. Take those fat cats down. They knew they were supposed to get a license.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
He should pay for getting MTV airtime rather than complain.
They're supposed to obtain approval from the orignal artist. Often it's easier to simply re-record the same bass line or drum beat themselves to avoid copyright problems like that rapper did with the police "I'll be watching you" bass line a few years back used in the tribute song to the other rapper that was killed in a stupid east vs. west rapper feud. (Vague enough for you?)
Most electronic musicians avoid the hassle by buying huge collections of royalty-free samples. There's a whole industry built up around it. Funny, I'm selling a huge collection of 19 Sample CDs for making electronic music right now on eBay.
Plugging slashdot rocks.
Maybe they can reach a settlement like Mike Rowe did... hey one of those cool new iPods and 50 songs would be sweet
</sarcasm>
$5 says they settle out of court and we never know the details...
anyone wanna take that bet?
Runnin' On Empty
the instant you create something its copyrighted.
Here is the google cache of the Grey Tuesday site. A site that is resisting the censorship of the 'Grey Album'.
To give Eminem some credit, he doesnt endorse any commercial product.
I think this is all being done as a publicity stunt or attention whoring. Maybe he wants to keep up his "bad boy" image, who knows.
If anything, it's free advertising for him. If they used his song in the commercial, people might be inclined to go, "Hey, I like that song!" and plow off to itunes like good little sheep to pay for it and download it.
I know if I was an artist and a commercial that was to be seen by quite a few people played my song, I'd be grateful.
I don't imagine he's in any financial distress as he's sold over 33 million albums and has more than enough money to get by for quite a while, so that's even more reason to think he's just doing this to be all tough.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
This is an interesting case. Anyone has the right to "cover" a copyrighted work, as long as the compulsory license is paid to the publisher (usually a per performance, or per mechanical fee).
However, in the case of endorsement, a specific license is indeed required (my wife - IANAL, but she is, ahem -- handles these from time to time). If the kid "singing" the song can be construed as an endorsement (probably), then Eminem deserves compensation.
Also, his likely fee ($10M) is definitely in the ballpark. You'd be amazed how much established artists make for these licenses. In fact, using an original song is usually so prohibitively expensive, that the licensor usually opts for a license to use a "cover" version only (much cheaper, but still a lot of money). That's why when you hear famous songs in commercials, they're often covers. FYI, in these cases, the language in these contracts usually requires a cover not to sound exactly like the original recording.
Maybe the MARS company should sue Eminem (M&M) for copyright infingement.
Considering it's his own label that he published it under, he does.
copyright: the government gives the creator of a work a limited time monopoly on the work and derivative works.
It is a privilege and a reward for contributing to the realm of public knowlege (or culture, etc). It is not a property right. It is not unalienable. It is not permanent. The phrase "owns the rights" is idiotic on its face. A more proper term would be "holds the copyright".
These days corporations have turned copyright and patents upside down, and turned them into a system of legalized extortion and eternal ownership of works they did not even create.
The USPTO and current laws concerning copyrights and patents are corrupt and worthless, and need reform. Start by voting out of office a few corrupt senators who are well-paid lapdogs of the RIAA and MPAA. (Fritz Hollings et al)
Repeal the DMCA!
Hip hop "artists" are notorious for copying others' ideas. Jay Z is particularly bad. His latest album is called "The Black Album." Oh so original. If only those pirating bastards in Metallica hadn't released a "black album" (unofficial title of course) years before.
There's also the issue of hip hop "artists" copying each others' samples. It's not like most of what gets put out by their labels even resembles music. I wrote a MIDI generator in Java for a class that created music from patterns based on character data from files type-casted to integer notes that sounded eerily similar.
Not to knock electronic music or anything, but most rap is nothing more than bullshit, 2/3 illiterate rubbish rhythmically spoken over badly looped techno. I have seen more complicated bass lines in a beginner's guide to electric bass guitar than most rap.
That said. If they ripped his sample off and God forbid it is actually his (probably half or more isn't) then they should pay a small penalty. It's just a fucking sample. Of course only in the world of rap can a single sound be turned into the basis for a whole song I suppose.
Maybe this will teach the big companies to look more to rock bands, a genre which is far more likely to have the attitude "OMFG THEY WANT TO PLAY OUR SONG GIVE IT TO THEM QUICK DO IT BEFORE THEY GET ANOTHER BAND TO DO IT!!!!!" There are so many rock and metal bands that should damn near go into gladiator combat to get that kind of free publicity that there is no point in taking the risk.
Let's face it. The average big rapper takes their work far too seriously. I doubt even real rock musicians like Tool, Incubus and A Perfect Circle take their music nearly as seriously as Jay Z, Eminem, etc. Oh wait. We're comparing musicians and "artists" so that explains why. Musicianship is a way of life, "artistry" is a term applied to people who can sell an image.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Dude, your .sig is a 404. I think you want this: http://www.principiadiscordia.com/book/45.php
(You forgot the "book" bit).
At least Apple and MTV didnt sample any copy righted Silence. Slashdot even ran Story about it.
Really, how long before everything is copyrighted, every riff and sample. This is crazy.
here
And I was half way tempted to bust out my .wav extraction tool and ripz m3z s0/\/\3 3113t grrl r0c|
--Pete
What the heck does Grey Tuesday have to do with this?
Not only it's a shady thing to do... but it's a slim shady thing to do! He he he =P
From Zero to Hero... Starbuck Zero
correct me if I'm wrong but if you selling Eminems album (which iTMS is) wouldn't using an piece of it to advertise it come under the heading of fair use. I mean this is like Mattel suing Toys R Us for using Barbie in there commercials. Or GM suing me because I put out an ad that said Chevy for sale. If it was a iPod ad that would be one thing but they were selling the iTMS and Eminems album itself.
eminem should go back to being poor so that he can be his happy old self ... that way can find the inspiration to write good stuff again ( or at least think he is)
"but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
This is the same guy who, during a concert, gave a fan what was supposed to be a $45,000 (or some ridiculous figure) necklace to show he didn't care about money or material things. The only problem was the necklace was actually worthless crap.
Can't we get Mars candy to sue him for using Eminem? Everytime I hear him mentioned I suddenly want snackfood.
I'm sure lots of people notice barely-modified versions of classic songs showing in commercials. Marginal changes to lyrics ("I'm walking on sunshine, and don't it feel good" - minus the "whoa oh" part) or "New Every 2" versus "New Attitude" are enough to consider it a different work, and not copyright infringement.
I have NOT heard or seen this commercial. I do know that these small changes are enough to be legal. I don't know how much the words may/may not have been changed to speak to that much.
If the song is unchanged, does anyone know if Fair Use might be able to be applied here?
It has nothing to do with "samples". For those to lazy to look, they're just ads where various people are singing a capella, ostensibly along with the songs on their iPods.
They don't need to be cleared with the record label or artist, as this type of non-complete "reproduction" is legally allowable. It does not constitute an endorsement by the artist, and Eminem is a retard for even thinking that it does.
But in the US you can sue anyone for anything, so I guess we'll see how it turns out.
If you sing someone else's song, it's a cover, not a sample. A sample is when you play parts of someone else's song, modified or not. Sampling copyrighted music is technically illegal, but if you make your sample short enough, no one can tell. When they can tell where it came from, trouble is bound to follow, ie. EMI vs. the Grey Album ( http://www.illegal-art.org/audio/grey.html ). Covering, however, is totally legal, you just have to pay a small fee to ASCAP for the right to "use" the sheet music for it (whether you use it or not).
The real question here is whether the Apple ad made it seem like Eminem endorsed iTMS, in which case the issue is false advertising....
May I have your attention please?
..... i think ill stop before ruffle any more feathers.
May I have your attention please?
Will the really stupid intern who did not license the music from the original artist please stand up?
I repeat, will the really stupid intern who did not license the music from the original artist please stand up?
We're going to have a problem here..
Y'all act like you never seen a slashdotter before
Jaws all on the floor like Intel, like AMD just burst in the door
and started whoopin their ass worse than before
they first were
Please im not funny so make sure to mod me down to -3 offtopic, thanks again!
A Fatal OE Exception has occurred, Sig will now reboot.
Tech specs, features, quality, et cetera mean nothing to you? You limit your spending to products with commercials you enjoy?
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
Think he's going to rap about killing Steve Jobs?
Might have a new target besides his own mother.
This kind of use of a song is most likely covered by one of the many compulsory licenses. Music is used all the time in adds on TV, Radio and so on ... it woudl be silly if you had to get permission every time. You don't need permission to record a cover version of a song you just have to pay the appropriate licensing fee.
this is a last gas attempt at another 15 minutes, he's one step from making the "where are they now?" file
his posse probably approved it, but he was too gak'd out to grok it.
Since the site is slashdotted, I thought I'd share what info I can...
: www.greytuesday.org/+grey+tuesday&hl=en&ie=UTF -8
It's basically a freedom of speech civil disobedience thing based on posting DJ Danger Mouse's Grey album for 24 hours on your website (on Feb 24, "Fat Tuesday"), because EMI is (supposedly) wrongly trying to censor this work, as it is a remix of Jay-Z's Black Album and the Beatles' White Album. They claim rights to the White Album. The organizers claim that it is a respectful and positive derivative work and should not be stifled.
Hardly readable google cache here: http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:OqlsV9RPt3YJ
As a digital DJ myself, I'm siding with EMI. I don't care if your work is respectful or not. I don't care if its positive or not. If I put hard work into making music, you have no right to profit off that work by remixing that music without seeking permission first.
I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
Read the article at the top.... It mentions a 10-year-old kid singing "Lose Yourself", but I'm pretty sure the commercial had some kid standing around with his ipod and buds in his ears, rapping out (a bit faster than the actual song) "I'm the real shady youse the real shady please stand up please stand up" lyrics. It was a pretty disgusting image and a pathetic commercial. I'll take Microsoft's self-righteous commercials about helping kids reach their goals and striving farther over that Mac ad any day.
pussy pottymouth that is nothing but a poser
I believe, "Peter picked a peck of pickled peppers" is what you were looking for.
The song was not copyrighted unitl October 27, 2003. That was after the ads were pulled. Seems to me if they went to look up the copyright and found none they could use it until the copyright was filed. Basically the published did not own it until the copyright was filed so they are going to sue over a song they later owned... not which they owned when the ad was created.
Its called fair use... they clearly aren't taking money out of Eminem's pocket by running a 30 second add with his music... its free advertising if anything!!!
Similarly, I was about to buy a Dell with Windows XP, then I saw the Microsoft commercials with people flying around after using Windows XP. It was then that I realized that you had to be on drugs to use Windows.
I don't love iTunes or the iPod
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
How my heart bleeds. Won't someone please think of the artists?
In the article, it says that it was a performance of the song done by someone else. This type of use does not need to be cleared, even for advertising. How many ads haven't you seen that have a well known song, but performed by someone else?
Eminem, however, is listed as part composer for this commercial and every time it is played, he will/should be reimbursed for his efforts. But I can tell you that those rates are nothing to write home about.
The only time you need clearance, or a license, to use a recording for a commercial is if you use, well, the actual recording. This could be the case, as the soundtrack for this performance may contain samples from the original, but there is no way to tell from the articles.
If those samples do not exist in the commercial, Mr. Slim is acting kinda Shady in this case...
Later Eminem was quoted as saying:
"Yo the little ***** shouldn't have been singin my m**** f****** song. Anybody else I'd ah f***** them up good if I wasn't such a punk ass loser."
Word.
After all I don't want to sample without giving credit.
Superswell's Sample Law
Apple did not use Eminem's song in their commercial.
t ml.
Apple did not sample Eminem's song in their commercial.
Apple did show a 10-year-old girl COVERING the song, in Acapella.
Not only could this easily be definied as a cover, which requires no payment of royalties, but I would see it as a parody, which is covered under fair use.
I suggest you all review the Stanford Copyright & Fair Use Guide at http://fairuse.stanford.edu/web_resources/index.h
There is no case here, mark my words... Apple will win this suit, as Eminem has no case.
Everyone can say what they want to about Eminem, but being a techie/b-boy myself and watching almost everyone of my favorite artists sell out to Pepsi, Mike, And-1, Bentley etc... It has been really refreshing to see Eminem not endorse ANY of these companies and stay true to his art (no matter how conroversial it might be). This isn't about Copyright, it's about respecting an artists wishes to not be whored out by a company for profit, even if it is Apple (the same company behind logic platinum which Eminem used to make "Lose Yourself" which won him an Oscar).
Aye, a reference to Guybrush Threepwood? Arrrr, matey!
Ha, you've already posted a comment, so try moderating me now! Oh, so it was a Jedi mind trick, huh? Silly! :-)
LeChuckWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
CNN had this story early this morning. Slashdot is sampling CNN's samples.
Is this that awful music on the iPod commercials?
This is ridiculous. The ads contained a cover of the songs being sung, and like every other cover you hear, there's a compulsory license you can pay to get the right to perform someone else's music.
There was no sampling. Sampling is when I record what you say and play it back. Covering is when I just reperform it.
I agree with what some other people said -- Eminem suing Apple? I should download his audio on MP3 and show the whole world how he's got...oh crap, now I'm being sued.
--Dan
Not to knock electronic music or anything, but most rap is nothing more than bullshit..
rap != electronic music
illiterate rubbish rhythmically spoken over badly looped techno.
rap != techno
Please have the sense to research what you're going to criticize and then use generally-agreed-upon terminology so that others can participate.
Personally I thought it had to do with the fact that most companies don't want to be associated with him, for fear of consumer backlash. Associating with Eminem = Bad Karma.
Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
I can not believe my eyes here. When we have an RIAA artical you people come out of the woodwork about how we have to respect copyrights and such yet some rapper that you do not like tries to protect his and all you do is flame.
GIVE ME A BREAK, if eminem owns the copyright to this song then guess what? He deserves his money. end of story.
I'm going to sue averyone that uploaded from my Kazaa Lite folder. All you bitches are infringing on my infringed warez files.
Considering Apple's history of suing others for copying look-and-feel, trade dress, etc., it's interesting that Steve Jobs thinks using others' intellectual property for commercial gain shouldn't be a big deal.
This provision is what lets Marilyn Manson cover "Tainted Love" and "Sweet Dreams," Type O Negative cover Cinnamon Girl, Tori Amos cover Smells Like Teen Spirit (and, well, every song on StrangeLittleGirl, plus Bad Company on her Under The Pink tour, plus...)
As an aside, it's kind of ironic that Eminem is suing for use of his work, when Dido had no idea he had sampled her work ("Stan") until she heard the CD. Luckily she was "blown away" and agreed to it - and later toured with him...
geek. lawyer.
You can use portions of songs, usually less than 14 seconds, without any approval whatsoever from the artist, for ads on TV. it's complete and utter crap, but it has been upheld numerous times.
so Fugazi (who don't let anyone use their music) couldn't do anything when MTV (or some other network, i forget) sampled one of their songs for a commercial. same goes for a transplants song being used in a shampoo commercial. these aren't even major label artists, it both cases it is an artist owned label, but they couldn't do anything.
so, eminem really just is going for the attention grab. maybe he should get married for 55 hours or show the whole world his nuts on TV.
your friendly punkass anonymous coward.
Identifying herself with an instantly recognizable color?
When he first broke into the industry, he wasn't going to get anywhere being "badass" so he had to soften up his image by being mainstream - that means funny, even cute. So yes, he tagged himself with "M&M", but it has worked - the name is known worldwide.
He complains about being sued, and now he's suing. Yes, he has legitimate reason to, but you never know if those who tried to sue him had legitimate reason too.
Don't get me wrong, I think he deserves to file this lawsuit, and in fact I am a fan of his music. But it doesn't change the fact that he is doing something which he has openly expressed disgust for when done against him.
Artists dont have to get permission from the copyright holder to release a cover. They DO have to pay them however. Check Lessig's site for related discussion
As others have pointed out, Apple's ad agency used an entirely new, original recording of a person singing the song in question.
Such use is covered by the compulsory license provisions of 17 USC 115, part of the copyright title of the United States Code:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/115.html
As long as Apple provided notice to the copyright holder (usually the publishing company that owns the publishing rights to the music and lyrics) and paid the compulsory license fee, they're in the clear. They do NOT need permission for this.
Furthermore, since Eminem's likeness and the sound of his voice were not used at all in the ad, it's highly unlikely that there's any merit at all to the assertion that he is somehow entitled to fees for an endorsement of their product.
Since the licenses described in 17 USC 115 are compulsory and the fees are explicitly spelled out, that chunk of statute probably precludes any further claims Eminem could make unless what they did in the commercial went beyond the scope of the compulsory license. Based on what I saw in those ads it almost certainly did not.
This one's probably dead on summary judgment. I'd be surprised if Apple even tried to settle this one for more than their projected legal costs to get to a ruling on that.
-- Mark
That idea was sampled from Spinal Tap.
It's about creating and distributing audio recordings. There's no language in the statute limiting the use to which they can be put in any way whatsoever.
-- Mark
IIRC, 10-12 year old boy singing, at least 25 of the 30 seconds of the commercial.
From the statute:
A person may obtain a compulsory license only if his or her primary purpose in making phonorecords is to distribute them to the public for private use, including by means of a digital phonorecord delivery.
I think the meaning of this section is going to be the core of the dispute.
-- Mark
...on Apple's website. The ad was shown at whatever event the launch of ITMS was announced, but it was only briefly (if ever) posted on Apple's web site I never saw this ad on TV.
Did anyone else see this ad on the media the suit alleges?
My other sig is extremely clever...
His name really is Moaning ("I've had such a hard life") for Money. Hence M&M or Enimem.
Interesting history:
Back when Apple Computers was first starting out, Apple Music sued them for copyright infringement; specifically, the use of name "Apple". The judge ruled that since Apple Computers had no involvement with the music industry, or the creation of sound in general, there was no possibility of confusion in the mind of the consumer, and the suit was dropped.
When sound was added to the Mac's capabilities, evidently one of the programmers thought that this would open Apple Computers to another lawsuit from Apple Music and thus taunted them by including in the sound list a sound titled "Sosumi".
So now you know... the rest of the story.
Eminem isn't that bad of a guy, on a personal level. My father owned the vehicles and paid the drivers that transported his stage equipment between concerts (along with other figures such as Britney Spears and dozens of other "artists" I don't remember). Eminem was quite nice to the drivers, unlike Ms. Spears who was a complete bitch to them. (Or maybe the drivers were just mad about her not paying attention to them and "escalated" the stories a bit...)
:)
We got a couple huge (and I mean *huge*) bags of M&Ms from him because he liked the drivers so much, and my sister has a signed N'Sync poster (or is it Backdoor Boys? One of the two.) that Eminem personally got for her.
Eminem is also the guy who tried to keep my father's business from going bankrupt after the company that held the contract with Eminem's producers/rhodeo/whatever and my father's company (who leased the trucks/drivers to the other company) decided to screw us over majorly (6 figure losses). Granted, my father's company still went bankrupt, but it lasted a bit longer thanks to Eminem.
Despite that, I still can't stand his music. ~,^
And that wraps up today's episode of Stuff Nobody Cares About.
1. Performance
2. Melody
3. Lyrics
They used only the lyrics, but they didn't have the rights to them.
Here we have Apple, a company which owes its existence to copyright law... blatantly violating those very same laws.
I'm not a big eminem fan, nor an Apple hater... but they really do deserve to get their balls nailed to the wall on this one.
You didn't realize you had to be on drugs to buy a Dell when they had the "Dude, you're getting a Dell" campaign? Not even when the Dell Dude got busted for drugs?
Jason
ProfQuotes
In fact, one of his beats is an honest to god staple of rock and pop production (ignoring rap for the moment,) usually used quietly in the background to 'beef' up the live drum track. Sarah McLaughlan, etc, musicians like that regularly sample James Brown beats to sonicaly thicken a mix.
I think you're referring to the beat in "Funky Drummer", IIRC. If I'm wrong, then I'd be interested in knowing which song this actually is.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
>>Even so, the sampling could use more cow bell.
>God Bless Will Farrell
I just wanted to bring the thread back on topic. I wonder if anyone will get it.
Sigs are bad for your health.
Is the movie as good as the original short story? The original short story is one of the few things by Asimov which I actually like, and I like it a lot!
There are 10 kinds of people: ones who understand ternary, ones who don't, and ones who think this joke is about binary
and it's a giant computer trying to figure out the question to the answer to the meaning of life, and it's going to be demolished to make way for an intergalactic highway..
ok, have I posted enough for some "I get the reference too!" karma?
Eminem is just a front of the Illuminati. However, as you point out the Illuminati is just a front for Eminem.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Just remember to snap a few photos before you get back to earth.
What apple did is in no way similar to a kid singing along with his iPod, a civil engineering studden crippling people with his sonic attack at a Berkley kareokee party, or somone singing in the shower. They used his song to sell their lifestyle so people would give them money. "Oh but they're apple. They use BSD. And their industrial design features brushed metal, and plastic. We love them! We all love the underdog. Boo success! Booo!" I'm sure Apple would be completely fine with someone barrowing the look and feel of their operating system, or even "sampling" their software. Why I bet they wouldn't even jealously protect their logo if I wanted to use it, but drawn left handed in crayon, to sell my bags of "Apple Computer Manure."
Seriously. Fuck the hypocrites. And kill them. The last thing I'm for is "more rights for multi-national corporations, nothing for the little guy."
No, the irony here is that Eminem is suing for copyright infringement, but has no qualms about beating his wife, assaulting a bouncer, and regularly using drugs (except when on parole).
The difference? He makes $$$ money $$$ off of everything except the infringement, unless he brings a lawsuit.
Tupac took on Notorious B.I.G...
Jay-Z took on NAS...
Eminem takes on Apple computers, a skinny-bald-vegen-DJ, and a hand puppet.
Eminem is the greatest! Ive never seen an artist with so much talent! Sheer brilliance! Such mind boggling creativity! I LOVE HIM!
(sigh)
Im gonna go take a shower then kill myself.
First off: Apple did not "sample" Eminem's work. They quoted him. There is a huge difference between sampling and using lyrics. I for one (despite loving my iPod and Powerbook) would lean toward's Eminem's side in this case. His work (and even if you're going to debate sample politics, what Apple used is his beyond argument: his lyrics) was used without permission to enhance the sales of a product. Eminem deserves some form of compensation or fee for his "services." Which in this case equate to his writing of the song. Apple used "Lose Yourself" because of it's universal recognition and message, both of which were due to Eminem.
Anyone who claims Eminem deserves nothing for this is just wrong. This isn't someone listening to music in their room, passing out free remixes for fun and/or art; this is a case of someone using someone else's work in order to gain money. Pure and simple. Eminem should reap some of the profit.
-drew
He wrote it, did he not? That makes it his work, doesn't it?
You ever wonder why no one sings "Happy Birthday To You" on TV? That's right. It's a copyrighted work they would have to pay money to perform.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Eminem has never nationally endorsed any commercial products
so he doesn't endorse his own music, then???
I saw an interview with Robert Plant on VH1 Classics a couple of months back, in it he stated that really there is only so many notes to go around, everyone copies someone at some point in their careers.
Musicians (and actors) as gazillionaires is a relatively new thing in our society, I think a lot of them are really losing it though. In the old days musicians were paid much like the rest of us, for doing a job, ie, playing music for an event or for a group.
Do I think Eminem deservers $10mil to compensate for some 10 year old girl blurting out his "creation"? Heck no, give the guy a couple of hundred bucks at most, but move on.
These folks would be more than happy to collect royalties off us all when we hum their tunes in the shower.
It's time we brought some of these "stars" back down to earth a little. It's a never ending cycle and it's the consumer who is burnt because of it, is any actor worth $20million for 3 or 4 months work on a movie? I don't think so myself, but because some suits in Hollywood think so we're now paying $10 a ticket at the movies, meanwhile these "stars" pump out garbage like Gigli.
And WTF is with Britney Spears? I saw some video of hers yesterday and she's selling nothing but sex appeal, her singing stinks and she has little talent, but I guess wriggling yer bum is worth millions in the US. How about getting her to put on a concert where she actually stands still and sings her songs rather than runs around lipsyncing everything.
OK, none of us are fond of EULAs (except those few of us who actually write the thrice-cursed things). We all agree that companies that put ridiculous "first-born-child" type clauses in there should be shot.
But this has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Nothing. Whatsoever.
Whether or not the guy was being serious (actually, I kind of agree with him, it might be an idea), you're coming from somewhere out in left field with this. This is way, way outside the area of EULAs and in the realm of more general contract law. In fact, it is probably far more similar to the contracts they signed when they signed on to the labels than anything we mere mortals have ever seen, and most likely they (or their lawyers) actually READ the stupid thing before they let them sign. If such a clause is in there, it's relatively reasonable, in the context. And it is nothing at all like putting stupid stuff in licensing agreements.
So go away and find something productive to do.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
1) Lets get is out of the way that it was a forgettable pop song.
2) But as a fan of the music, what do you care who owns publishing or who makes a buck
3) The entire music business is corrupt. You bring no new insight.
It had to already be mentioned, but if not here it is. The Slim Shady LP sampled a song called Pigs Go Home and was sued by the current copyright owner, a 70 year old grandmother.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
Any use of the song requires a license from the publisher
I thought performance rights were licensed from publishers through organizations such as BMI, SESAC, and ASCAP, and that TV networks already paid for those.
His jive posturing like he's a tough guy.
The guy has a whiny nasal voice, his "tunes" are geared at 13 year olds, he has about as much street credibility as the next white 16 year old kid who grew up in white suburbia.
The fact that some people take him seriously is a testament to stupidity, not any special "talent" this guy has beyond self-promotion.
He makes brittany spears look like Mozart.
He's so badass, that all the 11 year old girls think he's pretty fly.
Word!
Whut-evvuh!
ALl he's proven is that if you're a wigger, you can sell bad rap to pre-pubescent teens.
"Slashdot is AGAINST artists getting fair compensation"
Careful. For a minute there, I thought you were going to argue that M&M is an artist.
Or maybe he is. An artist the way "Divine" is a girl.
...that the album was produced using macs, shouldn't Apple get some leeway with a license?
A little girl in a commercial sang a small part of a song written by some overrated guy who does that rap stuff.
The singer is suing for some stupid amount.
He should lose because he's a dickhead.
He won't lose, however, because we have a legal system constructed by, for and of the dickheads.
I hope this helps. :-)
--- Ban humanity.
Is the somewhat offensive term "wigger", which is fairly descriptive and dead accurate when talking about M&M.
...white or otherwise.. and frankly, I thought Vanilla Ice was more entertaining.
It describes a suburban white kid who adopts african american speech patterns. This is done for one of two reasons (a) The person doing is desperate to accepted by any group (b) They're trying to appear "tough".
In reality, a wigger is the lowest form of trash
But when your audience's average age is about 12, I guess you sell your soul to make a few bucks selling "music".
No, actually, I was stoned at the time. Didn't hear about it till later ;-P
Slashdot is always against artists getting fair compensation. Don't you remember that p2p sharing isn't ripping artists off--it's "sticking it to the RIAA?"
*rolls eyes*
Have any of the people slamming Eminem ever actually *listened* to his music? I mean paid attention to the words and the melody, and the way that he strings them together and executes the rhymes?
:)
Or are you just slamming him because it is something different - and you know nothing about it? Kind of like the Windows users who slam Macs, or the Mac users who slam Linux...
Sure, there is *lots* of Crappy(TM) rap out there. But Eminem is gifted, and talented. Just because you may not agree with his subject matter or the way he presents it, does not mean he is not an artist, or he is a punk, or whatever people are saying.
It's not politics people, you are allowed to experiment with your musical tastes and no one will think less of you. Take some time and listen to an Eminem album all the way through, paying attention to what is going on... Especially his more recent work - it is very good.
However, I don't think he will win this lawsuit... And in reality - I believe He AND Apple should just send me some money, 'cause they both profited off of ME.
Slashdotters think everything can just be used willy-nilly, and it's always "free advertising."
They didn't pay for your "advertising"--in fact, by law, they are legally bound to be protecting their intellectual property unless they gave you explicit permission.
I don't remember when it became cool to think nobody should protect their works.
Along with Microsoft and sendmail suddenly having an anti-spam alliance, it's been opposite-day here on Slashdot.
Maybe michael should start yelling again in all caps. At least it could be entertaining on a juvenile level.
I don't care what he did/said before, then he was just an idiot. Now he's a sack of shit for starting up a law suit over something I'd hardly call music anyway.
He's obnoxious, I wish people would quit supporting trash.
of course, your are the Verve (and sampling the Rolling Stones for "the freshmen)
Incubus are "real rock musicians?" Are you for real? Do you even know what rock is?
Does this mean that "The Real Slim Shady" was licensed in the spot with the annoying kid singing it, but not the one using "Lose Yourself?" I seem to remember seeing the earlier a lot, but not the latter.
If this is the case, then someone REALLY dropped the ball.
i just rcently saw an ad for a mens razor on tv, it showed a scene from his stupid movie where hes on stage rapping. i think its him at least, its close enough that it shouldnt matter if its really him it looks exactly like the scene. anyone else seen it? and why is he not sueing the razor company?
and what happens when i lisen to a song on my ipod and start singing it in public, people hear the song and its just like an ad right? what if someone likes the song they hear me singing and ask me what the song is and how they can get it? then offers me 1$ for my troubles, is that not an advertisment i could be sued over?
Eight Mile Style filed the copyright infringement suit ... At issue is an ad for Apple's iTunes pay-per-download music software, in which a 10-year-old sings Eminem's "Lose Yourself."
I agree. If a 10-year-old is singing the song, then it is a new performance (unless Eminem has a time machine.) To use Eminem's song for a new performance requires "mechanical rights", which are automatically granted for a set fee. Mechanical rights are applied for selling something that includes the copyright (but not perfomances) of an artist. I believe that should apply to advertising that does not include the artist's performance, but IANAL.
Most songs are handled by the The Harry Fox Agency (HFA). Eminem has 50 songs listed at Songfile.com, which is HFA's online license application for low volume use. The list does not include "Lose Yourself". If the song is not handled by HFA, then you must contact the publisher directly.
There is a lawsuit, so somebody believes they had the right to tell Apple they could not use lyrics in a commercial. But it is not about a "sample", because Apple did not use a "sample" of Eminem's performance.
I spend my life entertaining my brain.
You still have to negotiate distribution rights for a cover.
This case is in the bag for Emenem, his lawyer will be employing the Chewbacca Defense. Why would an 8 year old girl be singing an Emenem song from 'her' iPod? Those things are expensive.
That does not.... make... sense!
Here, look at the monkey!
also from here this bit about the song and copyright law:
So for those arguing that a "cover" of the song can sung without obtaining any rights, I would have a say that a precedence has been set and it does not appear to be in favor of Apple and Chiat Day.
I like microcars
Does anyone else think it was poor judgement to have a preteen boy rapping along to a song with these lyrics:
Damn, and they just finished paying off all their debts too...
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid =04/02/18/196222&mode=thread
Microsoft is a monopoly.(to big) Apple is an idiot. (to small) Linux is what it is.(just right)
To give Eminem some credit, he doesnt endorse any commercial product.
...except his hip-pop.... commercial music just sucks. particularly in the hip-hop area. as far as i'm concerned, the real hip hop has all but died, barring a few undeground artists... but most of the innovation has moved on to newer, hip-hop influenced genres. generally in american pop culture, by the time the white folk stop hating a black-music trend and start to embrace it, the black folk have moved on (as with ragtime, jazz, rock-n-roll, disco....)
The guy is biased garbage. And yes I am aware I can change my options to not receive news that he posts. However then I would be missing out on a great deal of good stories that this dumbass ruins.
I think you'll find that the artist that you're referring to is called Sting, as in what bees do, rather than string, as in old frayed rope.
On the other hand, copyright fees earnt by cover versions, etc is money for old rope, as they say here in Britain.
(I'll save the "I'm afraid not"/"I'm a frayed knot" gag for another time.)
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Imo, after "dissing" his mom, his dad, his GF's, his wife, his country, the world... he wondered what to go after next.
'Hmm, Hailey, You eating an Apple Yo !?'
>however we must think of a bigger picture where >lesser-known artists are not getting a fair >share and have no where to go.
C'mon....all together now:
"Wont someone think about the lesser-known artists."
Truly hope you meant it in this vein Hillary because that is the weakest argument I heard you give since your RIAA days.
zeke
is there a torrent file for the grey album? all of the mirrors seem to be overwhelmed...
This guy steals lyrics from other songs all the time. Quite frankly I'm amazed he gets away with it, but it disgusts me that he would have the gall to raise arms when somebody does the same to him.
First example that comes to mind is the very beginning of the song "Don't Understand" by Masta Ace.
Actually IT IS posssible for the 'fair use' clause to apply in a commercial situation. However in my (legal) mind, this case won't even make it to court because strictly speaking the actual song wasn't used directly for commercial gain. It was a tiny portion of the song, and not even the actual professional recording of the song, just the lyrics. I dare say they could probably have even used 10 seconds of the REAL recording and still got away with it.
Case dismissed! Eminem should be jumping for joy at the fact his song appeared on the television - Many less well known artists would PAY for the opportunity.
One last question... What the hell was a little kid doing listening to Eminem anyway? Isn't his album rated 'R'?
But he's just sooooo traumatized by his life.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
It's obvious that nobody here has any clue regarding performance rights, copyrights, or mechanical licenses. Everybody is assuming that Apple didn't have permission. Maybe they did. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Karma Schmarma
How is this different from someone on Saturday Night Live singing a Eminem song? Do they pay him every time they make fun of him?
What about the other artist covers they do? I don't understand how this is any different. Both are for commercial use - Apple is using the cover to sell iPods, SNL is using it to sell TV ads.
Anyway, seems like th same thing to me...
Damint people, is the distinction really that difficult?!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I would think there would be a huge diffrence between an "artistic expression" of a cover, and doing a cover for a commercial to sell something.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
what we've got here, is a failure to communicate.
everybody get together, try to LOVE one another
the kings and queens and guillotines are taking lives tonight
lets not take our own.
as everything turns to shit...
i wanna rock.
this has really hit me as the point at which i understand and see with great clarity the times that we live in and what a mess everything is. perhaps the higher level of this "food chain" will end up devouring itself. perhaps the open source community should start an org for musicians that only care about creating good music.
perhaps...
perhaps...
and of course, would the real slim shady...
"You get all the fun of sitting still, being quiet, writing down numbers, paying attention...science has it all."
If i was eminem, a stuggleing artist at the moment, i would be all over apple giving me free advertising, maybe this will have people actually listen to his songs?!
The state you live in has the easiest bar exam in the union.
Section two was entitled: Fastest way to chase an ambulance;
Section three: How to be a mouthpiece
Section four: How to wear cheap suits and drive expensive german cars
Section five: Poor people are the best for hustlin'
"I don't remember when it became cool to think nobody should protect their works."
You must be a farmer the way you keep makin' those straw men.
Eminem is a BIG PUSSY! He talks shit in his (c)rap songs, and when someone like Moby disapproves of his lyrics, he gets his boyfirends behind him (right where they should be ;) ), and then steps to Moby calling him a "girl".
If I were Apple, I would not pay him dog squat, but would not have used his music (if that's what you call it) anyway. Apple should stick to using talented artists, that way they at least get what they pay for.
Actually you are confusing a written song (handled by the publisher) and a recorded song (handled by the record label).
/. and of course in the rest of the US have a minimal understanding of the recording industry.
I am sad to say that it has become apparent now that the majority of people here on
The writer of a song and the person that performs a song are not always the same person. Even if they are, the ownership to the rights of the song and the ownership to the rights of the recording are seperate.
Anyone can record a song that has been published simply by paying a mechanical royalty (usually $.08 per sold copy). However use of a recording itself must be cleared by the record label (or the copyright holder of the recording) AND the publisher.
Mechanical royalties (recordings) are paid through the Harry Fox Agency to the publishers. Other performance royalties are paid through one of the 3 performing rights orgs:
ASCAP
SESAC
BMI
The thing to always keep in mind is that the lyrics/notation to a song are NOT the same item as a recording of those lyrics. Both are paid for seperately. If the recording artist and songwriter are the same person, then they "double dip" so to speak.
My degree is in the recording industry, I know what I'm talking about: http://www.MTSU.edu/~record/
Libertas in infinitum
That compulsory license fee is regarding lyrics/notation (copywrighted by the publisher), not the actualy sound recording itself (copyrighted by the record label).
Yes, anyone can record a song as long as they pay the standard $.08 fee per copy to the publisher. This is called a mechanical royalty.
We are talking about the lyrics/notation, not the actual recording of the lyrics/notation.
HOWEVER, to use the lyrics/notation in a broadcast type of setting or to sync it up to film/video requires negtioation as the standard rate does NOT apply in that case.
I know what I am talking about, my degree is in the recording industry:
http://www.MTSU.edu/~record/
Libertas in infinitum
'there is no such thing as "fair use" for commercial purposes'
There is some fair use in commercial space, just not as much. For example, had they used the lyrics in a review and sold it, A-OK as that is covered by Fair-Use. Your right that Apple's use is a no no though.
I am an audio engineer for an artist called "Double M". He has been around since the very early 90's obviously prior to Eminem. Double M was in a group out of Orlando called Triple Deep. He was slated to be in '98 Degrees' and was managed by the same people who did Backstreet Boys and NSYNC; (Phurst Degree Artist Agency)
His real name is Mark Matsuzek (hence Double M). He was born in Czechoslovakia during Communism and escaped to the US when he was 8. As he was about to become a national act he became a Christian and quit the secular side of the industry.
Now he has "The Double M Project" and fuses Eminem type raps in front of NSYNC type pop! Its a very interesting combination and a thrill to mix live.
http://doublemproject.com/
Also check out his studio: http://gotmusicproductions.com/
He is exceptionally talented and does music for the Orlando Magic. If you want some MP3s feel free to send me a mail SonicSpike@cfl.(noscam).rr.com and I will give you MP3s of his music.
Libertas in infinitum
The recording companies and the publishing companies are almost ALWAYS two seperate entities.
The right to sell sheet music of a particular song is held by the publisher, NOT THE RECORD LABEL! The record label has to pay the publisher in order to record the song (this is called a mechanical royalty).
In order to perform a song live the venue (or promoter) must have authorization from a performing rights orginization (SESAC, BMI, or ASCAP). This is usally a blanket license. The record label has NOTHING to do with this!
Also anything that is copyrightable (such as a song or work of art) is copyrighted the instant it is put onto a transferrable medium. It doesn't have to be registered with the US Copyright Office for it to be copyrighted. Registering it with the USCO does help incase there is ever a dispute they can say "it was registered on this date such and such etc"
My degree is in the recording industry. I know what I am talking about:
http://www.MTSU.edu/~record/
Libertas in infinitum
I cannot believe the audacity of Eminem, or whomever you believe is in charge of his management rights. This is complete garbage, and once again proves that he does not understand what Apple has done for musicians of all kinds. Sickening... just sickening.
Ok thats a celebrity deathmatch i'd like to see .. or at least a Celebrity toughman competition.
I'm thinking Steve Jobs would beat the snot out of that punk eminem.
Who makes you Sig?
One are more lawsuits really what we need here? Fight fire with fire and the lawyers always win?
Second it's very unfortunate that a form of music arrived which is entirely based upon sampling and the music industry hasn't collapsed yet.
Mechanical rights apply to the creation and distribution of CDs.
Songwriters also enjoy an audiovisual synchronization right that they can grant to allow the placement of a song in timed relation to a visual image. Without that synch right Apple owes Slim Shady some bling bling.
"Good artists plagiarize; great artists steal."
I'm taking a class on Shakespeare this semester. One of the things I've learned is that Shakespeare seems to have lifted all of his plots from other sources. He put out a great deal of effort adapting their work for the stage. Yet no one (other than students) would question the great bard's place in history.
Incidentally, I first heard Steve Jobs use the above quote. It was from a Bob Cringly PBS special. Steve Jobs had been accused of "stealing" the Mac's features from XEROX PARC.
What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean....
launch.yahoo.com is a webcast service that works pretty well (sorry, only IE, Windows and MacOS 8 with WiMP) . I started using it around sunday and can't understand how they pulled off the license issues.
As a matter of fact, this link from the Launch player shows that they're solving licensing issues with record labels. But I have no clue how Yahoo farmed such a large collection anyway (250,000) songs from all over the listening spectrum.
Launch is good for its friendsterish features, but Yahoo "wants in" and charges money on the features. Maybe when I start my job. It's not CD quality anyway and is targetted to broadband audiences for the obvious reasons.
"Wireless : LAN
It's finally on topic after all these years! From Feb 9 2001 posted by an Anonymous Coward.
I present to you, a rather long sample of "The Real First Poster"
The stupid lameness filter is really annoying me. This reads a lot better if you disregard all of the "- Lameness Filter Filler"s at the end of each line. I had to add these to get this posted.
Mods, please feel free to mod me redundant or overrated. But please be honest, this post is not Offtopic, Flamebait or a Troll. Thank you.
May I have your attention please,- Lameness Filter Filler
may I have your attention please,- Lameness Filter Filler
will the real First Poster please stand up,- Lameness Filter Filler
I repeat will the real First Poster please stand up- Lameness Filter Filler
we're gonna have a problem here.........- Lameness Filter Filler
Ya'll act like you never seen a first poster before- Lameness Filter Filler
mouse all on the floor- Lameness Filter Filler
like mom and daddy just burst in the door- Lameness Filter Filler
and started whoopin yer ass worse than before- Lameness Filter Filler
they first had endorsed- Lameness Filter Filler
buyin' ya a crappy computer (aaaaaah)- Lameness Filter Filler
It's the return of the...- Lameness Filter Filler
"awww..wait, no wait, you're kidding,- Lameness Filter Filler
he didn't just say what I think he did, did he?"- Lameness Filter Filler
and Mr. Cray said...- Lameness Filter Filler
nothing you idiots, Mr Cray's dead- Lameness Filter Filler
he's locked in my bassment- Lameness Filter Filler
microsoft women love Sig '11- Lameness Filter Filler
chicka chicka chicka First Poster,- Lameness Filter Filler
"I'm sick of him, lookit him- Lameness Filter Filler
walkin around, grabbin his GNU know what- Lameness Filter Filler
flippin' to GNU know who"- Lameness Filter Filler
"yeah, but he's so smart though"- Lameness Filter Filler
yeah, I probably got a couple of screws up in my head loose- Lameness Filter Filler
but no worse than what's goin on in your sister's webcam (eheheheh)- Lameness Filter Filler
sometimes, I wanna get on ZD and just let loose- Lameness Filter Filler
but cant, but it's cool for RMS to hump a dead GNU- Lameness Filter Filler
My mouse is on your link, My mouse is on your link- Lameness Filter Filler
and if you're lucky, I might just give it a little click- Lameness Filter Filler
and that's the message that we deliver to little kids- Lameness Filter Filler
and expect them not to know what a free software is- Lameness Filter Filler
of course they're gonna know what Microsoft is- Lameness Filter Filler
by the time they hit 4th grade- Lameness Filter Filler
they got MS-NBC, dont they?- Lameness Filter Filler
we ain't nothing but omnivores- Lameness Filter Filler
well, some of us carnivores- Lameness Filter Filler
who read other people's mail like crackwhores- Lameness Filter Filler
but if we can read your e-mail like it's available- Lameness Filter Filler
then there's no reason that a man can't forge spam from your account- Lameness Filter Filler
but if you feel like I feel, I got the antedote- Lameness Filter Filler
trolls wave your penis birds, sing the chorus and it goes........- Lameness Filter Filler
I'm First Poster, yes, I'm the real First - Lameness Filter Filler
all you other First Poster's are just imitating- Lameness Filter Filler
so won't the real First Poster please stand up,- Lameness Filter Filler
please stand up, please stand up- Lameness Filter Filler
cause I'm First Poster, yes, I'm the real First - Lameness Filter Filler
all you other First Poster's are just imitating- Lameness Filter Filler
so wont the real First Poster please stand up,- Lameness Filter Filler
please stand up, please stand up- Lameness Filter Filler
Sig 11 don't got to cuss in his posts to get Karma- Lameness Filter Filler
well I do, so fuck him and fuck you too- Lameness Fi
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
We live in a world where artists like John Lennon get murdered, but the vile and insipid like Eminem live free?
I got very confused when I saw the writing credits for "Put It Where You Want It" by the Average White Band - it was listed (IIRC) as Stuart, Gorrie, Sample.
I couldn't work out how they would have used a sampler back when they recorded it, and why was the credit just listed as 'Sample'..?
It turns out the wrote the song with the keyboard player from The Crusaders - Mr. Joe Sample...
IANAL
;)
Forget all the legalese for a moment and give a thought to just what is going on. Apple is intentionally using popular lyrics from a song Eminem wrote to sell their product. They are using his talent to put money in their own pockets. They should at the very least have to ask him for permission, much less royalties.
KISS theory in effect
AC time...
Listen to a few tracks that feature Eminem as a guest rapper. After a listen or two you'll notice something -- Eminem is a hell of a lot better than the other guy.
Eminem is worried about being taken seriously because he should be taken seriously. It's very popular to dismiss his rap, but most rappers would consider him top 5 all time.
Sorry for the rant, I'll go back to being subtle in my pedantic-ness.
Actually here is the difference using an example: every breath you take by P. Diddy, this is a remix, they used a song in a different way, changed the arrangement but the melody stays the same (only a melody can be copyrighted, drums and bass and stuff like orchestration are called arrangement because they do not "define" a song, they just make it better or worse), this is like copying the song, the copyrights must be cleared. Using a song from Eminem in a commercial without clearing the rights first isn't sampling, it's just moronic (do Apple really think they could get away with it?) copying, if the song is good enough to entice customer to buy from you, it's good enough to be paid for.
Samples too must be cleared but their use and capture is entirely different, take DJ Shadow for example, he samples countless bits and pieces from many song and arrange them so an entirely new song is formed. When you sample you actually use something that inspires you not the whole recording you made of it, for example, I might sample 4 bars of drums (arrangement, sample do not have to be cleared if the four (or one or eight or whatever) bars do not contain any recognizable melody --recognizable is left to the judge to decide--) just so I can later cut every drum sounds, map them to a pad bank or keyboard and use them to create an entirely different drum pattern, hence I was inspired by the tonal qualities of the drums not the beats it did. This isn't copying and cannot be considered like it because one would have to consider every person using the same guitar model (or whatever instrument) as copying one another since they use the same sound, tonal qualities cannot be copyrighted.
Sampling isn't copying, using loops of other songs to built a new one is a form of copying and then samples must be cleared, but sampling, in the true meaning of the word and art isn't copying, it's using you inspiration as a starting point.
What is an "Eminem" and why should I give a flaming phart?
I'd mod up, but you know, my karma sucks.
You're one of those who think someone automatically becomes a better person once they become a parent. I'm sorry but in this world, even in the idealistic perfect family, respect must be earned, not given. To suggest that someone who feeds, clothes and raises you is enough to gain respect is ludicrous and extremely short sighted. Children in this country go through child abuse of all forms, all the fucking time. Parents are becoming more and more lazy and attitudes like yours are precisely why this country has a young population full of uneducated deadbeats, drug addicts, and people living in poverty.
Check out the Eminem's lawsuit
So, *cough*, where is the eminem-apple-ad.torrent?
...you insensitive clod!
Dead with it, faggots.