and thus cm.o learned of vaporwave
If someone remixed something I released, and it blew up and they made millions, whether or not I'd be upset isn't the question. The question is should I have legal protection from that happening and I'd say no. I'm willing to sacrifice those possible rights for what I see as the greater good of having free access to work with music. I think this is just a fundamental philosophical difference between us. If you can't tell by now I'm a bit of a socialist anyway.
The problem is that what you are suggesting is subject to abuse. Just imagine if you made an ambient song and someone added a drum track over it, called it a remix and sold it and made thousands of dollars. How would most people feel in a situation like that? I don't know if there is a "greater good" in a situation like that when you consider the fact that most people would feel cheated if the law allowed others to exploit their work in this way. In order for you to say that it would be for the greater good you would have to weigh the distress such a thing would cause against the cultural benefits that you are suggesting, and I don't think the odds are in your favor. I think it would be very easy to make money by exploiting other people's work and thus it would discourage a lot of people from making music.
]]>and thus cm.o learned of vaporwave
Try it for yourself - grab Gary Low's "I Want You," throw it in Ableton, turn on Repitch Warp mode and slow the tempo down to 95. I couldn't believe what I was witnessing there. That's the actual Washed Out song as it is - there's not even a drum loop added, haha.
And here's video proof of someone doing it from scratch:
I was under the impression that the original question was simply about how he should name his tracks, not get into the finer points of copyright laws and all that
Reading back, I guess I hi-jacked this thread pretty hard. My bad. And I suppose my original question could be interpreted as me being a jerk. I wasn't trying to score points or embarrass anyone. I didn't understand the assertion that selling covers wasn't ok and was looking for clarification. I think I was bitten by the lack of textual tone.
]]>oh yeah, google found this in seconds
http://edmhero.com/how-to-publish-your- … legal-way/
Yes. As I have repeatedly stated, I'm not confused about what you have to do to legally release covers or remixes. I don't understand the rational behind it. I fundamentally disagree with the way US copyright law works.
]]>no, its just why you noticed some spite in my tone.
Uh. wow. Ok. I didn't get that at all but I guess I do now.
.and yes, you do keep going off topic, i haven't.
I don't see how I've gone off topic. I mean the thread isn't about this, but that's a different story I think. It started because someone made the claim that it was some how wrong to sell cover tracks, which is an assertion I objected to.
. others already laid out the differences in legality between remixes and covers in regards to who you are legally obligated to pay, i just was clarifying your confusion on covers vs remixes with helpful video links and using examples where people make money entirely off performing the works of others (alive or dead) which are the situations more likely to result in legal action beyond ceas & desist.. a cover or two in a set here and there usually wouldnt draw attention unless it blew up... from what i remember, that daft punk "da chip" chip cover album had to get pulled after a cease & desist
I know the what the law says. I just disagree that that is what it should say. This is an area where I think there is a huge gap between what is Right and Good (tm) and what the law says. I'm trying to find a rational for why people think that the law should work the way that it does and apparently making people really mad. So maybe this should be the end of the thread since we don't seem to be getting anywhere.
TL;DR for the future: I'm apparently wrong and an idiot but no one can give me any clear guide as to what is OK and what isn't. Probably because there isn't one.
]]>videos not loading would be on your end.. is youtube blocked for some reason?
Don't thinks so. Chrome is just being a jerk. I'll take another look later.
]]>