Music sampling is a creative technique that involves using pre-existing audio recordings from other songs or sources in a new musical work. However, music sampling also raises legal issues and challenges, as it may infringe the intellectual property rights of the original creators or owners of the sampled recordings.
I will provide a brief overview of the legal perspective of music sampling lawsuits in music law, and some tips on how to avoid or resolve them.
What is music sampling and why is it legal?
Music sampling is the act of integrating sounds embodied in a pre-existing sound recording into a new musical work. Music sampling can be done for various purposes, such as creating new sounds, paying homage to an influential artist, or making a commentary or critique on a social or cultural issue. Music sampling can also be seen as a form of artistic expression and innovation, as it allows musicians to create new musical works from existing materials.
Music sampling is legal if it is done with proper permission or authorization from the original creators or owners of the sampled recordings. This usually involves obtaining two types of licenses: a mechanical license for the underlying musical composition (the melody and lyrics), and a master license for the sound recording (the actual performance and production). The license fees and terms may vary depending on the nature and extent of the sampling, the popularity and value of the original recordings, and the bargaining power of the parties involved.
Alternatively, music sampling may be legal if it falls under the fair use doctrine, which is a legal defense that allows limited use of copyrighted works without permission for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. However, fair use is not a clear-cut rule, but rather a case-by-case analysis that depends on four factors:
- The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
- The nature of the copyrighted work
- The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
- The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
Therefore, whether music sampling constitutes fair use or not depends on the specific circumstances of each case, and there is no definitive answer or formula to determine it.
What are some examples of music sampling lawsuits and their outcomes?
Given the complexities surrounding licensing and the often unpredictable case-by-case analysis required for fair use, it’s perhaps unsurprising that music sampling frequently becomes the subject of significant legal disputes. Music sampling lawsuits are the primary battleground where rights holders challenge unauthorized uses, alleging infringement, and where artists who sample may raise defenses like fair use.
These disputes, which can be initiated by either the original rights owners (plaintiffs) or sometimes by the samplers seeking declaratory judgments, can lead to a range of outcomes – from confidential settlements and negotiated licenses to court-ordered injunctions halting distribution, awards of substantial monetary damages, or outright dismissal of the claims. Examining a few notable examples provides crucial insight into how courts and parties navigate these challenging issues in the real world:
- Bridgeport Music v. Dimension Films (2005): This case involved a rap song called “100 Miles and Runnin'” by N.W.A., which sampled a two-second guitar riff from a funk song called “Get Off Your Ass and Jam” by Funkadelic. The plaintiffs, Bridgeport Music and Westbound Records, who owned the rights to Funkadelic’s song, sued the defendants, Dimension Films and other entities involved in producing and distributing a movie called “I Got the Hook Up”, which featured N.W.A.’s song in its soundtrack. The plaintiffs claimed that N.W.A.’s song infringed their sound recording rights by using an unauthorized sample of Funkadelic’s song. The defendants argued that their use was de minimis (too trivial to matter) and fair use. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, finding that their use was de minimis and did not infringe the plaintiffs’ rights. However, on appeal, the Sixth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision and held that any unauthorized use of a sound recording, no matter how small or insignificant, constitutes infringement. The court stated: “Get a license or do not sample”. The case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
- Verve v. Wale (2013): This case involved a rap song called “Rather Be With You” by Wale, which sampled a vocal melody from a jazz song called “Bittersweet Symphony” by The Verve. The plaintiff, Verve Music Group, who owned the rights to The Verve’s song, sued the defendant, Wale Oyejide (Wale’s real name), who released his song as part of his mixtape “Back to the Feature”. The plaintiff claimed that Wale’s song infringed their musical composition rights by using an unauthorized sample of The Verve’s song. The defendant argued that his use was fair use and that he did not profit from his song. The parties reached an undisclosed settlement before trial.
- Drake v. Estate of Jimmy Smith (2017): This case involved a rap song called “Pound Cake/Paris Morton Music 2” by Drake, which sampled a spoken word segment from a jazz song called “Jimmy Smith Rap” by Jimmy Smith. The defendant, Cash Money Records, who released Drake’s song as part of his album “Nothing Was the Same”, obtained a license from Sony Music, who owned the rights to Smith’s song, to use the sample. However, the plaintiff, the Estate of Jimmy Smith, who also claimed to own the rights to Smith’s song, sued the defendant, alleging that the license was invalid and that Drake’s song infringed their sound recording and musical composition rights by using an unauthorized and altered sample of Smith’s song. The defendant argued that their use was authorized and fair use. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, finding that their use was fair use and did not infringe the plaintiff’s rights. The court considered the four factors of fair use and concluded that Drake’s song was transformative, used a small and insignificant portion of Smith’s song, did not affect the market value of Smith’s song, and served a different purpose and audience than Smith’s song. The case was affirmed on appeal.
What are some best practices for music producers and artists who want to sample music legally?
Music producers and artists who want to sample music legally should follow some best practices, such as:
- Seek permission or authorization from the original creators or owners of the sampled recordings before using them in your musical works. This may involve contacting them directly or through their representatives, negotiating the license fees and terms, and obtaining written agreements or contracts that specify the scope and conditions of your use.
- If you cannot obtain permission or authorization from the original creators or owners of the sampled recordings, consider using alternative sources of music that are free or low-cost, such as royalty-free music, creative commons music, public domain music, or original music that you create yourself.
- If you decide to use music samples without permission or authorization from the original creators or owners of the sampled recordings, be prepared to face potential legal consequences, such as lawsuits, injunctions, damages, or removal of your musical works from distribution. You may also want to consult a lawyer who specializes in music law to advise you on your legal rights and obligations, and to represent you in case of legal disputes.