scratchlive.net

I gotta ask.. how the fuck could sharing an ACAPELLA be illegal? ITS NOT EVEN THE WHOLE FUCKING SONG! FUCK FOR FUCKS SAKE.

because its still a piece of work that YOU didnt write, produce or create.

because it is!

wooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

*ding ding ding ding ding popcorns done!*

Alright... sits down to watch the show... some popcorn smoothe please. Thanks

so therefor ANY dj's recorded MIX should be considered illegal. hell.. a 2 second SNIPPET of a song would then fall under your definition of copyrighted work.

FUCK I'M CALLING THE RIAA RIGHT NOW. shuttin you all down!

yep dj mixs are classed as illegal,i got kicked of myspace for have a dj mix up,as i dont own the copyright

well there are illegal dj mixes ALL over this site and no one says SHIT.. but the second you ask for an ACAPELLA .. ACAPELLA = NOT THE WHOLE FUCKING SONG you get the forum police on your ass.. hell there are mixes where you have the ENTIRE original song play.. what the fucking fuck

who you calling forum police!
i could'nt give a shit about file sharing i do it all the time! i bet we all do!
thats the power of mp3s,
but i know its illegal and do all my file sharing on ILLEGAL file sharing site's ,but not on here!
i

posting mixes to be critiqued could easily be argued as fair use under copyright doctrine (at least in the US). how is a dj supposed to grow if the product of their job cannot be reviewed?

the dj am mixes, eh, that might be different.

acapellas are the actual performance by an artist. without that, the song would be nothing. if the vocals for a song really don't matter, i challenge you to play a night of music as performed by the countdown singers and see how far it gets you.

i'm not trying to be a jerk, but they really are two different things.

Ok.. so script the flip. Without the INSTRUMENTAL the SONG is NOTHING. So whats the big fuckin deal withi sharing acapellas?

I challenge you.. I CHALLENGE YOU to play a night with just acapellas =)

Enjoys the show... alcohol anyone?

you translated that wrong. the challenge to me should have been to play original vocals over top of different background music. oh, wait. those are blends, remixes, and mashups.

which sixxx <3's

thanks sixxxi ,i'll have a beer.

Sure thing Dax.... and I looooove me some mash ups. Especially the way off-key kind. :P

huh? My whole point is it shouldn't be illegal to share acapellas as they are not the complete song (whereas mixes often have the complete song).

You then pointed out that I should try to do a night as performed by countdown singers?! To which I said.. try djing a night with just acapellas. It won't work because they aren't the complete song.. and in turn shouldn't not be treated as such in terms of copyright and sharing.

lol,but saying that when you hear a good one,it makes up for the rest

TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 107

www.law.cornell.edu

§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Re: #3 - At the very least, an acapella would be HALF of the work in question. People have lost copyright infringement suits for borrowing THREE notes from a song before.

Re: #4 - Free would sure put a damper on the value.

Try contacting the record company, or Amy's A&R. Tell them you're a DJ et cetera and they might send it to you LEGALLY.
People ask all the time "How can I get promos?"
Sometimes if you contact enough record company people, maybe BS them a little about how great of a DJ you are, they'll send you free music for promo use that you can play, remix whatever LEGALLY.

And thats the problem with the law.. Fair Use in its current state is outdated. DJ's aren't playing other artists work for purposes of "criticism, comment, reporting, or teaching" on the original ARTISTS work but instead for their OWN. This could be argued ad infinitum in court.



Very true. However it should override fair use for DJ's mixtapes or not be applied at all for acapella's.

I'm out of popcorn. Someone get another bag ready.

p.s. under the same context.. how would sharing Acapellas not be considered Fair Use? You are going to use the Acapella in a mix/blend/trashup which then will be up for "criticism, comment, reporting, or teaching"

or sale?

The SHARING of the file is illegal... not what you may do with it afterward. That's why you can obtain it legally and then post it after you've blend it, etc. for criticism.

That's how I understand the above.

:P

Dax... or sale? Definitely illegal. Crooklyncrap is illegal.

i know it is
here in the uk we get lots of small run 7" bootlegs/mashups/remix
i have one a friend of mine did,tomorrow never knows by the beetles.thinking about putting that out on a small run 7" of about 500

I see.... anyway, any more alcohol? :)

I blame white people

I see dead people.

...and sixxx laying on the bathroom floor.

with your woman on top. :P <--- The Bathroom Bandito.

Sixx here playa.
*passes the popcorn to him=*
Get me a coke. Extra Large

whether anyone agrees or disagrees - its definitely illegal. any part of an acapella (could be one word), 2 beats from an instrumental, or like the mentioned above - 3 notes...its all copyright infringement.

on another note, FEDs are crackin down on mixtapes, especially now...but in reality, if you're not making thousands of dollars off of them - you probably wont get sweated. but i know for a fact that they've got 'squads' running around the country goin into indie music shops looking for 'mixtape CDs' without proper barcodes and proper track licensing.

djaction, if you do not own the copyright or have distribution rights for a piece of work, then you simply cannot distribute it. Sharing of music without proper legal permission is not allowed on this site. DJ mixes are a grey area exception, because the record labels tacitly approve those. But attempts to make commercial gain out of mix tapes would also bring the record labels down on you.

I'm not going to debate the merits of the fair use allowances of copyright law. I am simply going to state what I always do, and that is that sharing music that you do not have the legal right to distribute is not acceptable here, and repeated attempts to do so will result in bans.

So to everyone in this thread: please only provide information on legal ways to obtain the requested a cappella. Any attempts to trade this music publicly or via private messages will potentially result in being banned from this site.

BTW, it is not half of the work. Usually the acapella is a stand-alone version/track for which the labels of course hold their rights fully.

Even if it was not an official accapella, you have derived the accapella from their copyright-protected work (DIY-accapellas). They still hold the copyright. So no fair use would apply here either, I'd guess.

i was just trying to say that a "full song" consists of two parts.

You said my favourite word.

A full song is a song which is released by a label. If they release just the acapella - then it is their decision and it is a full song. That's how I understand it.

i sparked such a debate. my bad!

Not the firs time this has been discussed.... argued... etc.

i'm sure. it's an on going debate.

i've been on the hunt for this rehab acapella. i heard it in a mash up. i was able to contact the people that did the mashup, and it turns out they got it indirectly from the label. the label sent it out to radio stations, so they could do remixes. the guys that did the mashup work at a radio staion. (they have a mix show)
anyways. in relationship to this thread, and the debate about using acapellas in mash ups and the legal questions it raises, i'd like to find out how the radio stations deal with playing mashups, and blends in general. i'm sure they have some kind of policy in regards to crediting the spins to the right artists and their publishing companies. do they count playing a mashup as a spin for both the artist who created the vocals and the producer who made the beat? i'm going to ask some folks to try to get some more info on the subject. i'm starting to do some blends, mashups etc. and i'd like to know what sort of issues it raises when played on the radio. because as we all know, djs have been playing blends on mixshow for decades now, and with the popularity of "mash ups", they're getting played even more and more. radio stations keep track of their playlists, so as to not get into trouble with the record labels and their publishing companies. there has to be a policy in regards to playing these mashups, blends yada yada yada.

Wow. That is a good question indeed airforce 1. I hadn't thought about it. Because, if two songs are played together (mash up) who do they credit the song to? Both artists? Mmmh.. Do they have to pay royalties on both? I assume so. I don't know.

Good question indeed. Maybe a new topic? :)

^^very good question, but i think they do give credit to both - a 'mash up' is basically a super long 'blend'. back when hot mixing was the craze (esp for early chicago house djs from what i remember), they'd do blends that were what many would call mash-ups today...they'd take house or disco acapellas and lay it over another house beat. in any case, the playlists would say both songs

So basically instead of selling mixtapes I just have to ask for mandatory 'donations'.. =)

lol.... the whole concept of a 'mandatory donation' cracks me up. Gray areas exist but definitely that's not one of them I don't care how they twist it.

"for promotional use only" should be on your mixtapes somewhere if you are looking to stay out of trouble (along with no barcode)

of course you would have to have at least a semi major operation to be at serious risk of someone coming in and shutting you down.

how many people do you know that have had this trouble? around here there was a major bust a few years ago but its been quiet since then.

Haha. :)

if you get an instrumental, you can make an acapella.

yeah, i know, read the first entry in the thread, bozo..

so, is there even an acapella?

nope

DIY acapellas are garbage

lol @ bozo.

DJ Drama got shit raining down on him earlier this year because of mix tapes that it at least superficially appeared he had permissions for. www.freedjdrama.com

Asking for donations, especially mandatory ones, isn't going to appear much different from outright selling mixes, if the law comes down on you.

The more you involve money in your copyright infringements, and the more broad your distribution, the more risk you take.

if the above is true, then myspace should allow the mixes, maybe we as dj's can collectivly file a class action suit

actually, if you browse through the thread, you'll find that there is indeed an acapella for rehab. one that the label sent out to some folks. i don't have it. that is the reason i originally posted this thread. If i do get a hold of it, I won't share it on the serato forum because i don't want to get banned for illegal file sharing. And in the future, i will look elsewhere for acapellas. perhaps one of the many acapella websites or various blogs. Perhaps, sites with less discrepancy than the serato forum in regards to file sharing.
I would advise against file sharing, ofcourse. it's bad. i'm a bad person for file sharing.



not true. depends on the vocal and instrumental mix that was used to make the diy. I've gotten some great ones. i've made some decent ones myself. a little eq, maybe some noise reduction. they can sound pretty good. a studio acapella is always desirable, but if you don't have it, diys can be a great compromise.

Your gonna sue myspace for not allowing you post your mixes?! Its their site, they can do what they want to with it, also why waste all the money going after News Corp.

I use alot of mash ups on my mixshow. Radio stations have services that monitor every song they play. Whatever the person writes down as the song they hear, that's who get's the credit. Every day I can see who they credited the song to by looking online at mediabase. 99.9% of the time they pick the vocals as who gets credit for the song.

What about radio stations that have BDS?

i understand telling posters about the rules; but the popcorn shit is gay as fuck.

I know that service but I have never had my station monitored by them. I work for Clear Channel and they all use Mediabase from what I hear. From what I understand BDS works the same way.