Sample Outing: Stop Snitching

I've said it before but I'll say it again -- "sample outing" is bad news. When people publicize a producer's unlicensed sample source it's bad for music and it's bad for sampling. It's worse than plain old snitching because it's diming on a colleague, motivated by money and/or personal gratification. ("Aren't I cool? I found that guy's sample and now I'm sharing it with the rest of you. Now do you respect me?")

When you out someone's samples, you expose them and their labels to potential lawsuits. And this will kill sampling. You will be responsible for the death of sample-based music if you continue to do this. Labels will be less likely to risk liability with sample-heavy compositions; artists will generally stop sampling out of fear of getting exposed. That's why I urge all of you who make these compilation to STOP. Yes, you're awesome - you have just as many obscure records as the producers you envy. But if you want to impress the rest of us, do something more creative with them.

And for the music lovers who eat this stuff up, it really falls on you to boycott labels that issue these compilations. They do nothing more than capitalize off of another artist's celebrity while exposing them to potential liability (I'm looking at you Pete's Treats.) Websites that amass data about unlicensed sample sources should be pressured to close down. Let's keep that stuff private... scratch the labels off of those records, if you catch my drift. Publications like Wax Poetics have always been tactful about those issues and I wish other people would follow their lead.

As I see it, there are 4 situations where I think it's okay to release compilations of sampled material to capitalize off the fact that they've been sampled: (1) When the producer himself/herself has consented to the sample source's publication (or if the producer has reach some kind of deal with the sample source owner for mutual exploitation); (2) When the the sample is in the public domain (Can you wait until 2067?); (3) When the compilation makes no references to the sampling artist, producer, song title, etc (no cutesy end-arounds like "Bob Dorough - Three is a Magic Number (as heard on the album 3 Feet High and Rising)"; or, lastly, (4) When the sample is licensed and such licensing is made public by the artist in the liner notes of the album. (Yeah right, when in the world does that happen?)

Well, did you know that DJ Shadow actually licensed some samples for Endtroducing? I recently broke out my vinyl copy of Endtroducing the other day and was surprised to see the following songs acknowledged as being licensed in the liner notes: Bjork "Possibly Maybe"; Pekka Pohjola "The Madness Subsides"; Motion "Voice of the Saxophone"; Jeremy Storch "I Feel a New Shadow"; Tangerine Dream "Invisible Limits"; and Nirvana (the UK not Seattle Nirvana) "Love Suite".

Now, I'm not outing Shadow here because he acknowledged it himself in the liner notes. And I'm happy he did because I find it very interesting that, of everything sampled on Endtroducing, those 6 samples were cleared. But the point is this: yes, the world is a better place because Shadow taught many people about David Axelrod, et al but I think it's our responsibility as producers, music lovers, historians, and lovers of sampling to maintain a pseudo attorney-client privilege deal when it comes to sample sources. Why shit where you eat? That's what it comes down to. Think about it -- it's necessary for our survival.

posted by Chomp Samba at 6/09/2008 | 0 Comments