http://lineout.thestranger.com/lineout/archives/2013/01/18/why-mac-miller-owes-lord-finesse-10-million-dollars Comments On: Why Mac Miller Owes Lord Finesse 10 Million Dollars by Sean Jewell en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:15:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by 1992]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 22:43:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Magnus Robot Fighter]]> Fri, 01 Feb 2013 10:28:23 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Nasa]]> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:51:08 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:21:30 -0800 The Stranger Posted by ItsLuRocK]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:51:54 -0800 The Stranger Posted by ItsLuRocK]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:43:11 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Young Melon]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:39:09 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Sirius, the Dogstar]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:26:40 -0800 The Stranger Also, copyrights don't have to be registered to be valid. Ever. At all. End of story.
Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:25:08 -0800 The Stranger
@15 Good points, a lot of them. Dub plates are still used that way, btw. But that's the Caribbean, where at best you'd get copyright protection under French or Dutch law. This is America. Hip hop isn't going to die because Lord Finesse sued Mac Miller. If you're going to steal a beat, you sure shouldn't do it from a guys who song is called "Hip 2 Da Game". He's perfectly within his rights is all I'm saying. Whether or not it helps...well...
Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:22:20 -0800 The Stranger Posted by buddy hack it]]> Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:51:25 -0800 The Stranger
...this is so wrong on so many levels. hip hop has always been a competitive art form and one of the many competitions in hip hop involves taking someone else's beat and rapping over it. now mac probably wasn't trying to compete with lord finesse, what he did has been done by so many rappers in so many cases before this trial existed.

one could argue weezy's huge success is due to his stealing of beats and rapping over them.
rap mixtapes have for a long time been about rapping over other artists beats to either compete, show one's knowledge of hip hop, or to make an artistic statement. even lupe fiasco was first noticed because of his recycling of beats on his farenheit 1/15 tapes.

think about where hip hop came from...dub plates in the caribbean were an enormous influence on the art form and THAT involved the "stealing" of instrumentals and laying new vocals over them. this recycling culture of riddims exists to this day.

hip hop artists have been stealing beats for as long as hip hop has been around. this case is scary because it takes away from what makes hip hop so appealing in the first place...the low entry cost. anybody can pick up a mic and start spitting over their favourite instrumentals. and now if you show ppl your rhymes and ppl like them and you establish a career off of your "stealing" of beats, you can get screwed over like this??? thats not what i want to see.

dont think about what this case means for the artists who have established themselves...think about the would-be hip hop legends who are limited by their access to engaging production. these are kids who we are screwing over. remember that.
Posted by not a mac miller fan]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:31:53 -0800 The Stranger
...this is so wrong on so many levels. hip hop has always been a competitive art form and one of the many competitions in hip hop involves taking someone else's beat and rapping over it. now mac probably wasn't trying to compete with lord finesse, what he did has been done by so many rappers in so many cases before this trial existed.

one could argue weezy's huge success is due to his stealing of beats and rapping over them.
rap mixtapes have for a long time been about rapping over other artists beats to either compete, show one's knowledge of hip hop, or to make an artistic statement. even lupe fiasco was first noticed because of his recycling of beats on his farenheit 1/15 tapes.

think about where hip hop came from...dub plates in the caribbean were an enormous influence on the art form and THAT involved the "stealing" of instrumentals and laying new vocals over them. this recycling culture of riddims exists to this day.

hip hop artists have been stealing beats for as long as hip hop has been around. this case is scary because it takes away from what makes hip hop so appealing in the first place...the low entry cost. anybody can pick up a mic and start spitting over their favourite instrumentals. and now if you show ppl your rhymes and ppl like them and you establish a career off of your "stealing" of beats, you can get screwed over like this??? thats not what i want to see.

dont think about what this case means for the artists who have established themselves...think about the would-be hip hop legends who are limited by their access to engaging production. these are kids who we are screwing over. remember that.
Posted by not a mac miller fan]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:28:20 -0800 The Stranger Posted by ag80]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:00:25 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Detroit Murder Dog]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:53:57 -0800 The Stranger
This article was written like it was a report for school by someone who just did some Internet research.
Posted by Alkasmolik]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:03:43 -0800 The Stranger
There are so many factors, and good cases to look into. Beastie Boys vs. James Newton, The Verve vs. Mick and Keef, 2 Live Crew vs. Roy Orbison, George Harrison and the Chiffons...etc. Every case is different and has to be treated individually.
Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:32:36 -0800 The Stranger
But! a label or corporations somewhere own the rights to the master recording of Oscar Peterson"Dream of You". And as Finesse directly sampled (not replayed) this he or his label must have cleared it. if he didnt he is also in a bit of trouble....... but he cleared it right???

Secondly the publishing to Oscar Peterson "Dream of You" is owned by a Publisher somewhere .your "derivative work" argument may hold up as its only 4 notes though.

Glad to see Ness come out on top.
Posted by Justin Fashanu]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 07:28:05 -0800 The Stranger http://www.copyright.gov/ . I can't give you legal advice (though I do advise you to read my post a little closer because the answers to your questions and links to references are in there). But basically it's like mama said: ASK before TAKING, Don't take TOO MUCH, SHARE if you've been helped, and SAY SORRY when you get caught.

SEE ALSO: http://www.lib.purdue.edu/uco/CopyrightB…
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/
https://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-p…

Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:16:30 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Mike1234]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:19:36 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:17:58 -0800 The Stranger Also, $10 million is likely not an arbitrary number but rather a prediction worked up on the potential future earnings of Lord Finesse's work in this case. There are people (lawyers) who get paid to figure that stuff out, it is very much based in reality:

The legal penalties for copyright infringement are:

Infringer pays the actual dollar amount of damages and profits.
The law provides a range from $200 (if done unknowningly) to $150,000 (if knowingly infringing) for each work infringed (EACH work! 700,000 downloads on dat piff alone.)
Infringer pays for all attorneys fees and court costs.
The Court can issue an injunction to stop the infringing acts.
The Court can impound the illegal works.
The infringer can go to jail.
Posted by Sean Jewell]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:09:32 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Epiphany1998]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:44:31 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Epiphany1998]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:40:51 -0800 The Stranger Posted by F]]> Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:03:41 -0800 The Stranger