Eminem Sues Apple for Sampling his Samples 690
EvanKai writes "To celebrate Grey Tuesday, Eminem sues Apple to show his support for hiphop and sampling. CBS MarketWatch is reporting
that 'Rapper Eminem's music publisher is suing Apple Computer Inc., claiming the company used one of the hip-hop superstar's songs in a television advertisement without permission. Eight Mile Style filed the copyright infringement suit late last week against Apple, Viacom Inc., its MTV subsidiary and the TBWA/Chiat/Day advertising agency.' While the ad in question no longer appears, several similar ads can be found here. I can't believe Chiat Day failed to clear the use of these songs with Pink, Mariah Carey, and The Who... or whatever major label actually owns the rights."
Hey! Look! It's a cash cow! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sampling (Score:1, Insightful)
Sweet Jesus (Score:5, Insightful)
First Weird Al and now Apple... I hope no one ever buys that loser's albums ever again and he can go back to being poor white trash again.
free.... (Score:2, Insightful)
michael: RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)
John.
Gotta love irony.. (Score:5, Insightful)
How ironic! (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a silly lawsuit (Score:5, Insightful)
now we're asking why a super-rich like Eminem bothers to stop free advertising. however we must think of a bigger picture where lesser-known artists are not getting a fair share and have no where to go.
Reminder (Score:2, Insightful)
"Every million I make, another relative sues" (Score:4, Insightful)
It's Fair Use (Score:3, Insightful)
This Eminem (TM) guy's case is probably on shakey ground.
Well, duh, that's probably why they didn't hire him to endorse it, and instead paid someone else to sing a portion of the song indicating the kind of things that someone might expect to find on iTunes Music Store. Apple probably doesn't give a damn if Eminem endorses the service or not; they just want to inform prospective customers about what kind of music is available on it, not of Eminem's paid opinion of the service.Re:How ironic! (Score:5, Insightful)
New Litigious bastard (Score:5, Insightful)
Still Waiting on Lawsuits... (Score:2, Insightful)
Why didn't Van Halen sue Tone Loc? (U2 can sue him too, actually...)
Why hasn't James Brown sued any of the rap acts that have sampled his stuff? (and many, many, many hip hop songs have ripped off his stuff)
Why didn't the Jimi Hendrix estate sue the now defunct WCW (since I don't think Time Warner owns the Hendrix copyrights)? The nWo theme was nothing but a mishmash of Jimi Hendrix riffs, after all..
Did Sir Mix-A-Lot pay royalties to Black Sabbath for his rip-off of 'Iron Man'?
Where would hip hop be without ripping off other artists? At least if credit was given the way the classical composers did it (saying, hey, this melody is a derivative of "___" by "___"), I think it would be less of a big deal.
Now, Apple should have licensed the use of these songs - but isn't it just a bit hypocritical of Eminem to sue apple when the biggest rip-offs of music has been several hip-hop artists?
Someone who's more familiar with Eminem's music can answer this - but who has Eminem ripped off?
Re:My understanding... (Score:2, Insightful)
Careful on that slippery slope there... you might fall and hurt your argument.
Re:How ironic! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Dude, Chill (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't a short segment of under a specified time allowed for "fair use", or would that not apply to advertising?
Re:Commercial vs Creative Use (Score:5, Insightful)
It's called extortion. (Score:2, Insightful)
It is a privilege and a reward for contributing to the realm of public knowlege (or culture, etc). It is not a property right. It is not unalienable. It is not permanent. The phrase "owns the rights" is idiotic on its face. A more proper term would be "holds the copyright".
These days corporations have turned copyright and patents upside down, and turned them into a system of legalized extortion and eternal ownership of works they did not even create.
The USPTO and current laws concerning copyrights and patents are corrupt and worthless, and need reform. Start by voting out of office a few corrupt senators who are well-paid lapdogs of the RIAA and MPAA. (Fritz Hollings et al)
The pirates cry fowl (Score:0, Insightful)
There's also the issue of hip hop "artists" copying each others' samples. It's not like most of what gets put out by their labels even resembles music. I wrote a MIDI generator in Java for a class that created music from patterns based on character data from files type-casted to integer notes that sounded eerily similar.
Not to knock electronic music or anything, but most rap is nothing more than bullshit, 2/3 illiterate rubbish rhythmically spoken over badly looped techno. I have seen more complicated bass lines in a beginner's guide to electric bass guitar than most rap.
That said. If they ripped his sample off and God forbid it is actually his (probably half or more isn't) then they should pay a small penalty. It's just a fucking sample. Of course only in the world of rap can a single sound be turned into the basis for a whole song I suppose.
Maybe this will teach the big companies to look more to rock bands, a genre which is far more likely to have the attitude "OMFG THEY WANT TO PLAY OUR SONG GIVE IT TO THEM QUICK DO IT BEFORE THEY GET ANOTHER BAND TO DO IT!!!!!" There are so many rock and metal bands that should damn near go into gladiator combat to get that kind of free publicity that there is no point in taking the risk.
Let's face it. The average big rapper takes their work far too seriously. I doubt even real rock musicians like Tool, Incubus and A Perfect Circle take their music nearly as seriously as Jay Z, Eminem, etc. Oh wait. We're comparing musicians and "artists" so that explains why. Musicianship is a way of life, "artistry" is a term applied to people who can sell an image.
Re:Would it be cheaper? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes it's easier to pay for forgiveness than to ask permission.
KFG
Re:The Fine Print (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:New Litigious bastard (Score:4, Insightful)
They used his work without his permission, a public performance of his work, used to promote a product/service.
I can see the practicality of not wanting to endorse for Apple. The whole losing "street cred" thing. Now instead of a white trash hero who came from a broken home to dominate the hip hop scene, his image shifts to an uppity homosexual who buys Apple products.
It breaks down really easy. Big corporation with monopolistic ambitions broke the law. Individual sues based on his rights.
Just mentally swap out the parties. Instead of Apple, Microsoft (or IBM, or Intel, or whoever's the evil corporate demon of the hour), and instead of Eminem, your favorite unknown independant label artist.
Re:How ironic! (Score:3, Insightful)
One possible defense would be to say that the origin of the song is in question, as 8 Mile Style didn't have the song registered. Considering the circumstances, it looks like that would be a very poor plan.
~D
Re:The Fine Print (Score:3, Insightful)
Really. Honestly. You think it would be Smart? I know this is
How many times we have argued on
Having anything in the agreement that would allow unfair use of Intellectual Property would be anything but SMART. It would be stupid PR if it blows up to begin with and I am not going to delve into any ethical issues that you most certainly overlooked when you called it Smart.
Re:free.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:2, Insightful)
Wait, so today Slashdot is AGAINST artists getting fair compensation for the use of their work? I'm confused.
Attention: This is totally legal. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple did not sample Eminem's song in their commercial.
Apple did show a 10-year-old girl COVERING the song, in Acapella.
Not only could this easily be definied as a cover, which requires no payment of royalties, but I would see it as a parody, which is covered under fair use.
I suggest you all review the Stanford Copyright & Fair Use Guide at http://fairuse.stanford.edu/web_resources/index.h
There is no case here, mark my words... Apple will win this suit, as Eminem has no case.
Re:My understanding... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm on their side on this one, without being gay. It's all part of our great slow march towards true fair and equal treatment by the law.
Daniel
Re:Hey! Look! It's a cash cow! (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Sampling (Score:3, Insightful)
Eg: Talented musicians are good enough to make up their own notes and tonalities, so they don't have to play from the western 12 note scale or use the same V-I cadence that is in 90% of all songs ever written.
Whether or not you play an instrument (I play 5) has little to do with your value as a composer of original music. The same people who decry sampling or rapping as unoriginal probably don't know that all the Greats (from Beethoven to the Grateful Dead) either had people go to concerts to transcribe ('sample' the sheet music) competitors' songs, or based their entire careers on covers (in the case of the Grateful Dead.)
It is always amusing to see people try and establish a relationship between the process used to create music, and the relative originality or perceived value of that music.
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:5, Insightful)
He never enjoyed an upgraded status. I consider anyone who badmouths his mother, and calls them all type of vile terms trash, white or otherwise. He just happens to live in a golden garbage can.
Re:Law likely on Eminem's side (Score:4, Insightful)
Because that's the way the law is.
Isn't that how the cover versions show up in ads in the first place, because the original artists don't want to license their performances?
No. When you hear a cover song in an ad, it is only because the artist has licensed the song for use "as a cover only." The company then goes and pays someone else to record a cover version.
What you're saying is: Mechanical license is paid for eight-year-old girl to cover "Lose Yourself:" legal. Eight-year-old girl licenses performance to ad agency: illegal. How is that possible?
That's right. If you want to go and record yourself singing "Lose Yourself" you can do so -- and you can sell your cover on a CD (and pay a compulsary license per copy sold to Eminem every 3 months).
But you can't use the song in a commercial. That's the law.
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The pirates cry fowl (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"Every million I make, another relative sues" (Score:3, Insightful)
Really?
A large corporation uses one of his creative works to advertise their products without
permission, and he is a hypocrite for wanting to protect his works from exploitation?
His complaints about his relatives legal actions do not mitigate his right to try to protect his "art"
from being used for purposes for which he does not want it used for.
Re:My understanding... (Score:2, Insightful)
Two people who love each other who wish to spend the rest of their lives together.
Rather than a sacrament and a union of two people in order to rear children, what is it?
I am married (to a woman, and I am male), but have decided to not have children. Do you think I should not be allowed to say I am married?
Why not let polygamists get married, then?
Good question!
Re:The pirates cry fowl (Score:3, Insightful)
Summary of parent comment: RAP IS CRAP AND ISNT EVEN MUSIC, ONLY ROCK IS REAL MUSIC.
You don't have to like the genre, dude, but don't spew nonsense like claiming you can replicate a hip-hop hitmaker's skill with a simple Java program and arbitrary input. You can't.
Misleading Title - Nothing to do with Samples (Score:3, Insightful)
Artists dont have to get permission from the copyright holder to release a cover. They DO have to pay them however. Check Lessig's site [lessig.org] for related discussion
Re:The artists? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Commercial vs Creative Use (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the tact Slim Shady is taking, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, An 8 year old raps a few lyrics and we interpret this as an endorsement by Marshal Mathers? He must think his fans are more peanut brained that most. Does he endorse every numbskull with a boom box sitting on a corner playing his music? Does he worry that I'll see a blood covered 8-foot killer carrying rusty machete with peices of flesh still hanging off and a boom box playing "8-mile" and think "He must be a nice guy, because Eminem endorses him?
Maybe its some dumb publiscist, like the one that went psycho on Gary Layson while Jane was out of the country for writing this [janegoodall.org] cartoon. Jane later said she loved it and apologized to Mr Lawson.
Re:Would it be cheaper? (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that Apple should have cleared the lyrics first.
Re:My understanding... (Score:2, Insightful)
The big deal about being able to get a marriage license are the rights and benefits afforded, including but not limited to: purchasing health care for your spouse through your employer, hospital visitation rights, automatic designation of beneficiary, and even little things like getting a family membership at the local gym versus paying for two individuals.
Up until today, I've gotten a hearty laugh seeing the word 'sacred' paired with marriage. Are we talking the same sacred marraige Britney Spears entered into and stuck with for a grueling 55 hours? Is one's first marriage as sacred as the second, third or fourth? And does a couple who decides not to have children, or are even biologically incapable less sacred? Care to say that to their face?
I am gay, but don't need anyone's stamp of approval to live my life. But I'll be damned to have any institution impose on me restrictions on who I can love.
Re:Would it be cheaper? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, it was Christopher Walken who had the fever.
Re:Commercial vs Creative Use (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:5, Insightful)
The technical term (Score:1, Insightful)
It describes a suburban white kid who adopts african american speech patterns. This is done for one of two reasons (a) The person doing is desperate to accepted by any group (b) They're trying to appear "tough".
In reality, a wigger is the lowest form of trash
But when your audience's average age is about 12, I guess you sell your soul to make a few bucks selling "music".
another ad with m&m in it? (Score:1, Insightful)
and what happens when i lisen to a song on my ipod and start singing it in public, people hear the song and its just like an ad right? what if someone likes the song they hear me singing and ask me what the song is and how they can get it? then offers me 1$ for my troubles, is that not an advertisment i could be sued over?
Re:Sampling (Score:5, Insightful)
Barely audible? It was practically the only thing in the song.
hip-pop (Score:1, Insightful)
...except his hip-pop.... commercial music just sucks. particularly in the hip-hop area. as far as i'm concerned, the real hip hop has all but died, barring a few undeground artists... but most of the innovation has moved on to newer, hip-hop influenced genres. generally in american pop culture, by the time the white folk stop hating a black-music trend and start to embrace it, the black folk have moved on (as with ragtime, jazz, rock-n-roll, disco....)
Re:Sampling (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Would it be cheaper? (Score:3, Insightful)
They were the number one musical act for the year just a few years ago (1999 I beleve).
Not bad for a group that broke up in 1970.
I'm still amazed that there is no one around today that compares with the breakthroughs that the Beatles did. In the span of just 8 years they went from "Love Me Do" to "Sgt. Peppers" and the White Album...AND were loved by both critics and fans alike. I don't know anyone that has done that since...meaning growing so much musically while still being popular and relevant.
But sure, there are people out there that may not like them. But then again, there are also those that just say they don't like something because everyone else likes it. They want to appear different.
Re:Sweet Jesus (Score:4, Insightful)
What the? (Score:1, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:1, Insightful)
A little diffrent though? (Score:2, Insightful)
WRONG! (Score:5, Insightful)
The right to sell sheet music of a particular song is held by the publisher, NOT THE RECORD LABEL! The record label has to pay the publisher in order to record the song (this is called a mechanical royalty).
In order to perform a song live the venue (or promoter) must have authorization from a performing rights orginization (SESAC, BMI, or ASCAP). This is usally a blanket license. The record label has NOTHING to do with this!
Also anything that is copyrightable (such as a song or work of art) is copyrighted the instant it is put onto a transferrable medium. It doesn't have to be registered with the US Copyright Office for it to be copyrighted. Registering it with the USCO does help incase there is ever a dispute they can say "it was registered on this date such and such etc"
My degree is in the recording industry. I know what I am talking about:
http://www.MTSU.edu/~record/
Re:Hey! Look! It's a cash cow! (Score:2, Insightful)
That takes Apple fanboyism to a whole new level.