>would it be bullshit if the original rights holders brought
>suit against people who didn't clear samples?
>
>or are people just mad because this guy came around and is
>doing it?

I am mad because it's not like clyde stubblefield isn't getting (publishing) money.. He never was.. he created famous breaks as a "work for hire" and then the label gets the publishing.... THEN someone who has nothing to do with the original song gets paid years later? That's bullshit..

>
>the fact that someone has the wherewithall and foresight to
>recognize that a market can be exploited does not make their
>actions bullshit. it's sheer capitalism.

I agree... but capitalism can also just be simply poaching... I "get" what he's doing but I don't have to respect it or condone it.

>
>and lol @ him asking kids what samples were poppin being some
>kind of awful practice. why don't you find those kids and be
>mad at them for telling?
>
>maybe if much of this information wasn't so readily available
>by people on forums and the internet who are in a hurry to
>brag about what sample came from where, it would be a bigger
>issue.

I think there is an overall issue with copyright law... I don't believe people should be paid a crazy ass amount of money for their "master clearance" (maybe a flat rate). I feel like you either approve or you don't negotiate a % and keep it moving.

>
>and re: my previous reply.
>double O's comment seemed to address the fact that copyright
>suits were being brought over drum loops specifically, as if
>they are any less integral to beats/beat making than other
>loops.