-
1 of 10
-
2 of 10
-
3 of 10
-
4 of 10
-
5 of 10
-
6 of 10
-
7 of 10
-
8 of 10
-
9 of 10
-
10 of 10
Copyright Criminals mixes law, music
Evan Westerfield
Comments
Story
“The question to ask is what is at stake because of sampling?” said Ted Apel, a music technology instructor and an electronic sound installation artist. “What I mean is musically, if we outright outlawed sampling or borrowing.”
These are the questions raised by the film “Copyright Criminals” a film shown as a part of the PBS community cinema series. The film is a documentary by Benjamin Franzen and Kimbrew McLeod documenting the story of music sampling and its clash with copyright law. The film covers music sampling from its roots in underground hip-hop culture starting in the late 70s up to the digital age in which anyone can create music, video, or digital mashups on their home computer.
'Apel and Jirak' ZACH GANSCHOW/ THE ARBITER
Apel conveyed a classical music reference of Pierre Schaeffer, who recorded sounds from the world, train whistles for instance and used them in compositions. “Schaeffer used emerging post-war (World War II) recording technology to create musique concréte. His intention was to extend Western musical tradition by introducing non-musical sounds into the music domain.
He theorized: a note was a note and it didn’t reference anything.” Apel said Schaeffer, by the end of his life, considered his work in musique concréte a failure because he didn’t think it became music. “The point is it is a new thing in music to make reference to the external world.”
Wallis Bratt, a music composition and theory instructor, agreed with Apel’s view: “We all borrow from one another. If you were writing a paper and took four words at random from a paragraph you found about the same subject would it be plagiarism? Now if you took: ‘How now brown cow’ and said in a paper: ‘Brown cow how now,’ would it be plagiarisms? It depends on how artistically you look at it.” Bratt, who has written some compositions based off melodies both in and not in the public domain, espoused the way current legal channels in music work: “In plagiarism what is most important is: do I have permission? If you have money great, if not watch out. It is a fine line, a very fine line.”
“The case seems to be the technology is a head of the legal system,” said Jim Jirak (who directs the BSU jazz ensemble).
“The technology is ahead of the music, The technology is always ahead of music,” Apel said. “Though the film’s topic is a little outdated, we can all steal on a micro level now, because we’re all little artists thanks to Youtube.”
Most of the crowd left after the panel finished speaking, but a few stayed afterward to continue the discussion. Jay Saenz, a 31-year-old History major from Boise, however stayed to talk after the panel.
“Sampling for profit without the artists’ permission is infringement of rights,” Saenz said. “The film changed my opinion. I have more respect for sampling, and traditional artist should be more receptive. They should worry about growing their own art.”
Saenz thinks that copyright law should be more open. “I think copyright law should be changed to an open license, similar to Lennox, called gnu. That may be more financially viable and creatively stimulating. Financially viable because artist don’t get paid a lot of money for the music they record, whether on an Indie record or a big one.”
For information about the upcoming movies in the Community Cinema 2009/2010 Season Schedule check there Web site here. Copyright Criminals will air on PBS in January (check local listings).
Do you agree with copyright laws?
Yes.
No, but only when it has to do with sampling. It is taking the old and creating new art.
No, Vive piracy. Vive the Pirate Party.