Search options (Page 36 of 58)

my music is getting me bitches.... big time. i do it for the bitches. has that been said yet?

does anyone else find it odd that this whole thing is about a photograph of miles davis; an artist whos entire career was based on 'illegally' appropriating popular songs and making new music out of them?

Or even that photography in and of itself is inherantly appropriative?

I hope this guys name becomes synonymous with 'hypocrite'.

A lot of people seem to be insisting on a baseline assumption that Baio took a chance, and was unlucky enough to get nailed. That's not really the case. Look at it this way: speeding's illegal. Unless (for example) you're an on-duty ambulance driver. If you're an on-duty ambulance driver exceeding the posted speed limit, you would not be entertaining the question of "Hmm, I wonder -- am I in violation of the law right now?" It's just a built-in and understood part of the law that in certain contexts, speeding is permissible.

Similarly, copyright law permits reproductions of, and references to, copyrighted works, without permission, in certain contexts. Kind Of Bloop's sleeve art was produced in accordance with this understood aspect of the law, and was legitimately believed by Baio to have fallen well within those accepted contexts. Baio in his mind was not taking a risk, was not trying to get away with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_as_a_defense wrote:

...some copyright owners frequently make claims of infringement even in circumstances where the fair use defense would likely succeed in hopes that the user will refrain from the use rather than spending resources in his defense.

Oh, also, the music was boring/vanilla-as-shit.

I'll agree that the problem of "what-the-fuck-is-he/she-doing-up-there" plagues gameboy musicians. That's where triggering loops live, soloing/muting and playing with the EQ come in - something that allows the audience to build a relationship between what they see happening and what they hear.