http://www.vibe.com/node/114605

THIS SHIT RIGHT HERE SON!!

"While West and his label, Roc-A-Fella/Universal, paid a $62,500 license fee for use of the track, Tuf America/Tuff City doesn't think that's enough."

THESE MOFO'S!!! LIKE FA REAL!! YOU GOT A FUCKING $62K CHECK AND YOU SUING A MOFO FOR MORE!! AND WHY?!! BECAUSE YOU FUCKING CAN!!! SURE KANYE MAY BE ABLE TO COME UP OFF DAT, BUT NOT ONLY IS IT BEYOND THE AVG MOFO'S MEANS AT $62K IF THEY HAD IT TO PAY YOU, YOU TRYING TO ASK FOR MORE!! SHIT'S FUCKING BRIBERY SON!!
________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." © Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."
A PHASE!!

and IMO, since they already got paid the license fee for its use, I hope they lose this BS

can't sit there and make up the rules as you go along... they made the system, someone actually abides by it and now you're like "NOPE"?!!

FOH

________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." © Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."
A PHASE!!

.

NOT YET AT LEAST SON!!! DON'T WORRY THOUGH, SOON COME SON!!!
________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." © Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."
A PHASE!!

NOT YET AT LEAST SON!!! DON'T WORRY THOUGH, SOON COME SON!!!
________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." © Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."
A PHASE!!

-------------------------
“The other dude after me didn’t help my case. It was just like…crazy nigga factory going on.”
Dre makes no apologies for his own eccentricities. “I was young, and searching, trying to find myself,” he says. “Never did.”-- Andre B

I can't even put it into words.

__
I don't like the beat anymore because its just a loop. ALC didn't FLIP IT ENOUGH!

Flip it enough? Flip these. Flip off. Go flip some f*cking burgers.(c)Kno

Allied State of the National Electric Beat Treaty Organization (NEBTO)

he pulls shit like this yearly.

he purchased "impeach the president" and sued 1 million bucks for everyone who used it.

he's a bloodsucking leech.

just saying?

Aaron Fuchs is one of those record label kats who didn't do well with Tuff City when it first started but found a way to make tons of dough by purchasing rights to certain records that he knew he could make money off off the publishing when others sampled it.

He was already getting some good checks for 45 King's "900 Number" jam but he then went and bought "Impeach The President", he bought a bunch of rare Mississippi blues artists joints, not sure if that's doing him any good though.

Whomever owns the E.S.G.'s "UFO", I've heard is an asshole as well, demanding anywhere from 10,000 to 100,000 to anyone who samples it, c'mon that's just bullshit.

>Whomever ownz da E.S.G.'z "UFO", I've heard iz an azzhole az
>well, demandin' anywhere from 10,000 to 100,000 to anyone who
>samplez it, c'mon that'z juzt bullzhit.

Well dat'z one kut dat juzt dominatez da sound when you uze it it really carriez a lot uv da work fo' katz. Lyke I alwayz be sayin' Martin Hannett iz one uv da unzung heroez of hip hop LOL! :-)

He kept saying he was neighbors with the owner -- implying he should eat for free, but the owner only vaguely knew who he was.

He didn't bring his wallet with him at all. So he says he's going home to get it and doesn't come back for hours and hours, until he comes back in to write a check. If he is indeed the owners neighbor, his place is two blocks away.

if they didn't get the license to use it

and just used it anyway

I bet nobody would have been able to hear it either

which as you stated if they never said nothing.... could have been anything they wanted it to be.

Founder of M.W.S
(Insert comment here) We insert all the time!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xhC-XPkqqk

As in "you ready? YEAAAAAH. OH!" The "OH!" is looped a number of times. First time is at 1:00, and it loops every two seconds. You can clearly hear it at 1:31.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyQpQhrQ5Zs






THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif
http://i50.tinypic.com/hvqi4w.jpg

smh

Fuck this dude... He buys up songs that contain famous drum breaks then sues people who used them.. DRUMS SON...

bullshit...

i'm pro-sampling as well, but that argument is kind of specious.

he's been doing it for years-he used to ask kids into Hip Hop what the breaks were on certain songs, then buy them just to sue niggas and get money
THATS the bullshit part

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?

the bottom line is that you have to pay to play.
at this point in the game, no one should be shocked when an attorney comes calling over their uncleared sample use. crying over the person who is suing is kind of a moot point.

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.

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 generally who are in a hurry to brag about what sample came from where, it would be a bigger issue.

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.

>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.

>I am mad because it's not like clyde stubblefield is getting
>money.. He never was.. he created the breaks as a "work for
>hire" and then someone who has nothing to do with the original
>song gets paid years later?

how many times have you, as an established hip-hop producer, reached out to clyde for drums? he's still alive and, by necessity, working.

>how many times have you, as an established hip-hop producer,
>reached out to clyde for drums? he's still alive and, by
>necessity, working.
should we work with the original musicians out of sentiment if they can't capture the sound we want? alot of breaks have a specific that has as much to do with the recording technique and equipment limitationa as it has to do with the drummer. matter of facts some of the top breaks are quite simple patterns.

i don't know what you're getting at here. other than to maybe guilt trip him? lol....

as you are well aware, even in hip-hop there is more to being a producer than making a beat. with technology and so many skilled engineers, the record-sampled aesthetic you're referring to can be synthesized/recreated. it's a collaborative process. you do your due diligence and book the studio, the drummer plays, and you and who you choose to work with capture it and turn it into the sound you want. we see with this topic and so many similar stories what the alternative can be.


>i don't know what you're getting at here. other than to maybe
>guilt trip him? lol....

it's something i've been getting at for years when it comes to these still living drummers behind classic breaks, many of whom have health problems, including clyde. i'm not singling out double 0, i just seized the opportunity to ask since he feels strongly about these musicians and he has skill and other means as a producer.

>>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..

kind of sounds like you're arguing that rights to art shouldn't be transferable or sold.

as a random example, it's like saying a broke michael jackson shouldn't be able to sell the rights to his catalog to someone who "has nothing to do with original song."

of course the issue in this arena is that most of the clyde stubblefields didn't get their just due in their day, and its more likely that some label or publishing house owns "their" rights. i agree it sucks, but its mostly water under the bridge. the fact of the matter is that, under current law, whoever owns those rights is entitled to come at people who use their property without clearance.

>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.

this is a fair point of view.
but i think it's a matter of you being close to the subject matter (music and sample clearance). if you exported the exact same practice into a different arena, i doubt people would be so up in arms about it. maybe, maybe not.
from his point of view, dude is basically protecting his investment. *shrug*


>I think there is an overall issue with copyright law...

yeah, there're lots of them. I agree with that.

>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 don't think it's okay to charge copious amounts of money for some shit after the fact, for one, and for another I have a problem with someone who has no problem doing so and not at least helping out these guys that played this shit and are hurting right now
there's no reason Melvin Bliss had to die broke and doing house parties, not having the money to get proper care for his ailments


>the bottom line is that you have to pay to play.
>at this point in the game, no one should be shocked when an
>attorney comes calling over their uncleared sample use. crying
>over the person who is suing is kind of a moot point.
>

you're basically saying that it's fine to use any sort of tactic to get over that you want because it doesn't matter how you get it as long as you do


>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.
>

you can call it what you want, but suing people for using something you now possess when they used it during a time you didn't possess it is indeed bullshit


>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 generally who are in a hurry to brag about what
>sample came from where, it would be a bigger issue.
>

they didn't know why he was doing it, smartass
but the part you don't know is that the kids worked in his warehouse and he wouldn't pay them
but I guess it's not his fault for stiffing children because they went for it, right?


>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.

only when read by somebody of a polishpro pedigree like your nigger ass

first of all, i'll ignore the baseless and petty insults.

>I don't think it's okay to charge copious amounts of money for
>some shit after the fact, for one,

the logic for charging "copious amounts of money" probably has something to do with the idea that the breaks we are talkin about have acquired worth over the years.

so maybe in 1985 it would have cost $5k to clear impeach the president (that's a random figure). but after it has been used by numerous artists, its market value has likely gone up. do i think $1Mil is reasonable? hell no. but that's not my determination to make. the market determines that. if someone is going to pay $60k for it, then that's what it costs.

>and for another I have a problem with someone who has no problem doing so and not at least helping out these guys that played this >shit and are hurting right now
>there's no reason Melvin Bliss had to die broke and doing
>house parties, not having the money to get proper care for his
>ailments

First, you can't make a statement like this without actually being privy to what did/did not go on behind the scenes. do we know what kind of contracts these guys signed in the first place? maybe they were screwed. maybe they weren't. maybe they signed away their own rights for good compensation, maybe they didn't. my point is that many of these guys are not well off now, it's very true. but it is not the case in EVERY situation that a musician dying poor is the fault of some crooked record exec somewhere.

i have no idea about melvin bliss' individual circumstances, but as howisya stated, if producers in 2012 are really worried about Melvin Bliss, then maybe they should book the Melvin Blisses of this world for sessions instead of sampling their previous work and being upset when they are sued down the line by an unrelated party.

it's unrealistic to expect anyone who acquires the rights to any art down the line, to double back to see how well the creator is doing in life. it's a nice sentiment and it would be great if that happened every time, but it's not always practical.

>>the bottom line is that you have to pay to play.
>>at this point in the game, no one should be shocked when an
>>attorney comes calling over their uncleared sample use.
>crying
>>over the person who is suing is kind of a moot point.
>>
>
>you're basically saying that it's fine to use any sort of
>tactic to get over that you want because it doesn't matter how
>you get it as long as you do

Sorry. how am i saying "any sort of tactic to get over" is acceptable? lol Explain how you got from A to B?
What i explicitly said was that in the present landscape, being sued for sample clearance is very much a reality that anyone who uses samples should be prepared for. Whether or not you get sued by the guy who actually played the drums or a 4th party who later acquired the rights to the drum loop will not change the fact that YOUR bank account will be $X lighter at the end of the day. That was my point.

>>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.
>>
>
>you can call it what you want, but suing people for using
>something you now possess when they used it during a time you
>didn't possess it is indeed bullshit

Let's put it this way.
Your neighbor (X) paints a painting.
Y likes the painting and starts selling a copy of it, without consent.
The painting becomes famous, and Y is making money off it, without consent.
X sells you rights to the painting.
You find out that Y has been infringing upon your rights in the painting.

Under copyright law, you are entitled to go after Y.
particularly if his use of Y is infringing upon your rights in some manner.
it's bigger than just samples.
what if Y is a hate group that is using the painting to promote their message.
should you not go after them because they started using the painting before you acquired the rights to 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 generally who are in a hurry to brag about what
>>sample came from where, it would be a bigger issue.
>>
>
>they didn't know why he was doing it, smartass
>but the part you don't know is that the kids worked in his
>warehouse and he wouldn't pay them

them not knowing why he was doing it doesn't really make a difference, imo. the onus is ultimately on the guys who used the samples to clear them. you have to expect that samples will be discussed, and its not farfetched that whoever owns the rights will come after you.

As far as the guy in question allegedly being a scumbag who stffs kids their rightful wages, that has no bearing on this specific issue. he might very well be a jerk. i don't have an opinion on that.

>but I guess it's not his fault for stiffing children because
>they went for it, right?

where did i say anything of this sort?


>only when read by somebody of a polishpro pedigree like your
>nigger ass

cheers to you too, guy.

>first of all, i'll ignore the baseless and petty insults.
>

I'll decide what's basless and what's not, chump


>the logic for charging "copious amounts of money" probably has
>something to do with the idea that the breaks we are talkin
>about have acquired worth over the years.
>

it has something to do with Aaron Fuchs being a douchecaptain, it's not about the value of the shit
he's throwing out high numbers just because he can


>so maybe in 1985 it would have cost $5k to clear impeach the
>president (that's a random figure). but after it has been used
>by numerous artists, its market value has likely gone up. do i
>think $1Mil is reasonable? hell no. but that's not my
>determination to make. the market determines that. if someone
>is going to pay $60k for it, then that's what it costs.
>

you have blind faith in the market system apparently
but that's not the point-the point is this guy has been doing this for years and does just what you're doing: 'the law says...'
you can make anything you want illegal and hide your fuckboyism behind the law, happens everyday
doesn't make it okay or excusable


>First, you can't make a statement like this without actually
>being privy to what did/did not go on behind the scenes. do we
>know what kind of contracts these guys signed in the first
>place?

yes we do


>maybe they were screwed. maybe they weren't. maybe they
>signed away their own rights for good compensation, maybe they
>didn't. my point is that many of these guys are not well off
>now, it's very true. but it is not the case in EVERY situation
>that a musician dying poor is the fault of some crooked record
>exec somewhere.
>

in this case, it is (both on the front AND on the back)


>i have no idea about melvin bliss' individual circumstances,
>but as howisya stated, if producers in 2012 are really worried
>about Melvin Bliss, then maybe they should book the Melvin
>Blisses of this world for sessions instead of sampling their
>previous work and being upset when they are sued down the line
>by an unrelated party.
>

he was too sick to travel and do session work, so that's not an option
besides that, nobody minds paying for samples, we're talking about a person that buys shit and jacks up the price on it because he's legally allowed to do it, which is wrong regardless of legalities


>it's unrealistic to expect anyone who acquires the rights to
>any art down the line, to double back to see how well the
>creator is doing in life. it's a nice sentiment and it would
>be great if that happened every time, but it's not always
>practical.
>

fuck unrealistic, and fuck practical
he could cut people checks if he wanted to
you mean to tell me a guy that can bloodhound samps without knowing shit about the music business isn't smart enuff to get an address?
the same guy you said shouldn't be faulted for usage of said smartness?
th' fuck outta here


>Sorry. how am i saying "any sort of tactic to get over" is
>acceptable? lol Explain how you got from A to B?
>What i explicitly said was that in the present landscape,
>being sued for sample clearance is very much a reality that
>anyone who uses samples should be prepared for. Whether or not
>you get sued by the guy who actually played the drums or a 4th
>party who later acquired the rights to the drum loop will not
>change the fact that YOUR bank account will be $X lighter at
>the end of the day. That was my point.
>

first off, check the post above this one for you saying that
also this isn't about niggas paying for samps, that's not the issue


>Let's put it this way.
>Your neighbor (X) paints a painting.
>Y likes the painting and starts selling a copy of it, without
>consent.
>The painting becomes famous, and Y is making money off it,
>without consent.
>X sells you rights to the painting.
>You find out that Y has been infringing upon your rights in
>the painting.
>
>Under copyright law, you are entitled to go after Y.
>particularly if his use of Y is infringing upon your rights in
>some manner.
>it's bigger than just samples.

that example only works is there's a Z and Z gets the rights to something after finding out that people are getting money for those sorts of paintings and he wants in
THEN the Z nigga has to birddog 5o Y niggas so he can cop those paintings and pull the same shit over and over and over and over again, and even after that he decides to go after niggas that are 3o yrs removed from using the shit


>what if Y is a hate group that is using the painting to
>promote their message.
>should you not go after them because they started using the
>painting before you acquired the rights to it?
>

your side of the argument isn't about ethics, it's about someones legal right to do fucked up shit
don't confuse the two


>them not knowing why he was doing it doesn't really make a
>difference, imo. the onus is ultimately on the guys who used
>the samples to clear them. you have to expect that samples
>will be discussed, and its not farfetched that whoever owns
>the rights will come after you.
>

you're making 'coming after niggas with larger than life prices just because the law backs you' into 'fuck niggas that want you to pay for samps'
that's not the deal here, chief


>As far as the guy in question allegedly being a scumbag who
>stffs kids their rightful wages, that has no bearing on this
>specific issue. he might very well be a jerk. i don't have an
>opinion on that.
>

it's not alleged, and it has ALL the bearing on it because it shows you how low he'll go to get paid
if he's not above stiffing kids and most people he associated with have left him alone, that tells you a lot about his exploitative business practices
also if you don't know shit about the subject, don't try to engage in the conversation on any sort of stance one way or another
we know what the law says, that's not the issue here


>where did i say anything of this sort?
>

you said it when you stepped up to bat and said it was okay because copyright law is in his favor

it's going to tuff city's profit margin....

and again, how does the money going to tuff city's profit margins invalidate anything stated above?

like Kaney is some chop wizard or something
Fuchs strikes again

The beginning anyway for a really dope song.