“Similar to its cousins the patent trolls, [Bridgeport Music Inc.] and companies like it hold portfolios of old rights (sometimes accumulated in dubious fashion) and use lawsuits to extort money from successful music artists for routine sampling, no matter how minimal or unnoticeable. … Since 2001, Bridgeport’s shotgun approach has led to many dismissals and settlements, but also two major victories. … there’s only one appellate court, the 6th Circuit, that takes the ridiculous position that any sample, no matter how minimal, needs a license.” (Tim Wu (Columbia lawprof), Slate, Nov. 16). Frank Pasquale at Concurring Opinions has some further thoughts: Nov. 21. More on sampling litigation in Ted’s “Overlawyered iMix” post, Aug. 9, 2005, and comments.
2 Comments
The same scam is being done for intellectual property as with the Unix C patents. The US PTO is worthless beyond anything the Soviets even came up with which is why so many large companies now rely on “secret formulas” instead of patents. Where is the outrage?
If copying someone else’s recording is so trivial, why don’t these “artists” just play their own version? Could it be that many are musically incompetent and must resort to lifting someone else’s work, running it through a computer in order to make their own music? I am only an amateur musician, but I wouldn’t think of lifting another’s track, putting it in my song, then calling it my own. Common sense tells me it wouldn’t be my own.