barc0debaby
Posting Freak
Posts: 2138
Registered: 3-18-2006
Location: My mom's basement
Member Is Offline
Mood: Punk as Fuck
|
|
Rob Kelly Adresses Dropkick Murphys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVT2z7if9Ok
Thought this was interesting.
|
|
|
Johnny_Whistle
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Registered: 5-26-2010
Location: Location, Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: the voices
|
|
Interesting. I didn't know anything about all this, but he's got a point. I'd like to hear the song now.
|
|
|
ShawnRefuse
Posting Freak
Posts: 1975
Registered: 1-20-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0824a6eb82/rob-kelly-dropki...
|
|
|
Discipline
* DRUNKEN MONKEY *
Posts: 11900
Registered: 9-8-2004
Location: Over here
Member Is Offline
Mood: The Alley Dukes
|
|
That song really sucks. Sucks moose cock.
‘Do you know what a love letter is? It’s a bullet from a fucking gun. Straight through your heart.’
|
|
|
BKT
Posting Freak
Posts: 2476
Registered: 7-6-2004
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline
|
|
I like Slaines part. Other then that nothing special, none the less they guy has a very good point.
BKT.
|
|
|
Mark Lind
Posting Freak
Posts: 1900
Registered: 9-18-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
What a dope. Obviously they DO own it or they wouldn't be able to prevent him from using it. He lost me as soon as he started playing the victim with
his whole thing about them having enough money and him being poor and Irish. Same old Napster argument about Metallica. Go back to the studio and
replace the riff and remix your song and stop trying to gain publicity for yourself at their expense. Problem solved. The song will get released.
Anyway, back to never hearing of this guy before.....
|
|
|
Jason the Magnificent
Posting Freak
Posts: 3880
Registered: 8-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mark Lind
What a dope. Obviously they DO own it or they wouldn't be able to prevent him from using it. |
I don't care either way...but you seemed to have kind of missed the point with what he was saying there...me explaining it further would be redundant.
|
|
|
Mark Lind
Posting Freak
Posts: 1900
Registered: 9-18-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Jason the Magnificent
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mark Lind
What a dope. Obviously they DO own it or they wouldn't be able to prevent him from using it. |
I don't care either way...but you seemed to have kind of missed the point with what he was saying there...me explaining it further would be redundant.
|
No, I understand his point. But his point is proceeding from false assumptions. That song isn't a traditional. They wrote it and they own the rights
to it. He's saying they are telling him they can't use it when it isn't theirs. It is theirs. He also said that they got rich and famous using
traditionals but that's also not true because they wouldn't be able to collect publishing royalties for songs they didn't write. That dude's argument
is full of holes and he's counting on people to not fully understand the music business so that they sympathize with him. And that leads me back to
sympathy and him playing the victim. If he thinks they've somehow wronged the little guy then he is free to use his art as a method to shove it in
their faces. Maybe it will give him the motivation to be the next Eminem. But he isn't free to use someone else's song or recording without their
permission and no one owes him an explanation or anything else. Or he can continue to eat Ramen noodles and complain about it. Who cares?
|
|
|
Jason the Magnificent
Posting Freak
Posts: 3880
Registered: 8-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Not I enough to argue about it. Just saying his argument wasn't as black and white as you first made it, not that he's right...nor that it held any
weight.
Though I also don't buy that there's some record of all traditional Irish music ever that DKM is tripping over themselves to pay royalties to Scotchy
McGuilicutty and the Shalelee's either...
|
|
|
Mark Lind
Posting Freak
Posts: 1900
Registered: 9-18-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
I don't know what they do, to be honest. I never really could get into the whole plastic paddy thing. But that dude's argument is just flawed. The
Stones and The Beatles aped American rock n' roll; that doesn't mean that Mick Jagger has to give Insane Clown Posse or some other American rapper the
rights to sample "Satisfaction" just cuz they've made enough money off American music. Yet that dude is essentially saying "they made money off Irish
music and I'm Irish and poor so they should give me the green light". It doesn't matter if it's Dropkick Murphys or Dido or The Police or any other
band or musician; they have a right to control their material in any fashion they see fit. Hopefully this dude hits the big time. But once he does
then he'll see how absurd his argument is when the next kid is coming along and accusing him off having enough money.
|
|
|
clevohardcore
* Kick\'n ass on the wild side *
Posts: 12937
Registered: 9-19-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sick Of It All, Youth Of Today
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Discipline
That song really sucks. Sucks moose cock. |
Each aspect of the soul has it's own part to play, but the ideal is harmonious agreement with reason and control.
|
|
|
tireironsaint
* BANNED *
Posts: 4299
Registered: 5-14-2003
Location: Colorado
Member Is Offline
Mood: Beltones
|
|
The fact that this is even a debate is part of why I can't stand most rap/hip hop or whatever. Somehow it's ok to take somebody else's music and claim
you've made something new out of it? Seriously? He's pissed off that they won't let him make money off of their recording in his song? How is this
even a debate? If it's true what he says about it being a riff from a traditional Irish song then shouldn't he be able to lift the riff from some
other recording and, I dunno, maybe ask whoever recorded it for permission first? He makes the claim several times in that video that it's not their
riff, but obviously it's their recording and they have rights to it, so why cry about it and make yourself out to be a douche? I enjoyed his reasoning
for not asking permission when he said that "somebody in Boston" told him the Murphys had heard his song with their music in it and they liked it. I'm
sure that will go over real well as evidence for his case if this thing goes to court at some point.
Veritas odium parit
|
|
|
mattybar
Senior Member
Posts: 805
Registered: 1-3-2008
Location: South London, UK
Member Is Offline
|
|
is that guy in a bunch of danny diablo videos?
the only thing that interests me about this guy is after reading up on him apparently he's down with Jay-Z and Memphis Bleek and so on. If this is
true, it wouldn't surprise me if they just pay the Dropkicks off anyways. It ain't like Jay-Z can't afford to.
i really don't like the dropkick murphys anyhow so fuck it, i'm gonna root for this dude.
do your thing, rob kelly.
|
|
|
jonnynewbreed
Posting Freak
Posts: 1091
Registered: 4-4-2003
Location: Dartmouth, nova scotia
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quite nice actually.
|
|
This relates to the course I teach at the local college around music copyright:
If the tune is a trad song DKM would own that sample as they recorded it and therefore own the master right to that specific sample. If this dude
wanted to re record the sample he could and wouldn't have to pay DKM anything.
On the other side if it's not a trad (read: public domain song) and DKM wrote it then this could happen: In the US there is something called a
compulsory mechanical license which means that if a song has been commercially released anyone can re record that tune as long as they pay the
prescribed mechanical royalty rate of 8.1 cents per unit pressed without asking permission of the original copyright owner so long as the song isn't
being used outside of it's original use. That means that if DKM didn't want their tune used to sell stuff.
The Verve V Rolling Stones is a perfect example of this shit. I have an awesome case study that would blow your minds but this is all I could find
short form on the net:
http://thevervelive.blogspot.com/2005/05/bitter-sweet-sympho...
|
|
|
jonnynewbreed
Posting Freak
Posts: 1091
Registered: 4-4-2003
Location: Dartmouth, nova scotia
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quite nice actually.
|
|
It is also something that rap artists face all the time as their music is primarily based on samples.
Check out this film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHw8w6il_FQ
|
|
|
Johnny_Whistle
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Registered: 5-26-2010
Location: Location, Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: the voices
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mark Lind
I don't know what they do, to be honest. |
What a lot of Irish bands do is use old traditional dance tunes and add lyrics to them, either ones that they wrote or (in the case of DKM), something
from Woody Guthrie. That's why on a lot of records, you'll see credits like "Trad., Arr. by ...", which is how they can claim the song as theirs.
It's the "Arr. by..." part that they're using to block the guy from sampling it, although they claim to have written the music (which is wierd,
because I know I've heard the tune itself at sessions for years).
|
|
|
SS76
Posting Freak
Posts: 1586
Registered: 5-6-2008
Location: CT
Member Is Offline
Mood: RAMALLAH
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by BKT
I like Slaines part. Other than that nothing special.
|
Silence is golden but violence is platinum. |
|
|
mattybar
Senior Member
Posts: 805
Registered: 1-3-2008
Location: South London, UK
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by jonnynewbreed
It is also something that rap artists face all the time as their music is primarily based on samples.
|
Yeah that occurred to me too.
Personally i think the DKM's are being dicks about it.
If anything, it's an homage to them and will bring their name and music to a whole new crowd of people so it would benefit both parties.
the fact they have a lawyer clambering for cash in their name doesn't really sound too punk rock to me.
|
|
|
Mark Lind
Posting Freak
Posts: 1900
Registered: 9-18-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by mattybar
| Quote: | Originally posted by jonnynewbreed
It is also something that rap artists face all the time as their music is primarily based on samples.
|
Yeah that occurred to me too.
Personally i think the DKM's are being dicks about it.
If anything, it's an homage to them and will bring their name and music to a whole new crowd of people so it would benefit both parties.
the fact they have a lawyer clambering for cash in their name doesn't really sound too punk rock to me.
|
The only thing I've ever heard about this is from the video but it sounds like it's not about the money. He said that he offered them 100% of the
money. So obviously they don't need his money. They're probably concerned that they are on the verge of being considered a one-hit-wonder so they need
to protect the usage of the song. Or it could just be that they want to protect the integrity of the music. Which is punk rock.
| Quote: | Originally posted by Johnny_Whistle
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mark Lind
I don't know what they do, to be honest. |
What a lot of Irish bands do is use old traditional dance tunes and add lyrics to them, either ones that they wrote or (in the case of DKM), something
from Woody Guthrie. That's why on a lot of records, you'll see credits like "Trad., Arr. by ...", which is how they can claim the song as theirs.
It's the "Arr. by..." part that they're using to block the guy from sampling it, although they claim to have written the music (which is wierd,
because I know I've heard the tune itself at sessions for years). |
I don't think it's traditional at all. I think it just sounds strikingly familiar and that's why the song has resonated with so many people. Stuff
like it has been done for years. They just got lucky with something vaguely familiar to people that was 100% new.
I know what you're saying with the arranged by thing but it really wouldn't make much of a difference here. Most bands cap out at around 10 songs for
mechanical royalties. DKM albums have much more than 10 songs so it's not like they're really profiting from those recordings. They're filler. Imaging
filler, in my opinion.
| Quote: | Originally posted by jonnynewbreed
This relates to the course I teach at the local college around music copyright:
If the tune is a trad song DKM would own that sample as they recorded it and therefore own the master right to that specific sample. If this dude
wanted to re record the sample he could and wouldn't have to pay DKM anything.
On the other side if it's not a trad (read: public domain song) and DKM wrote it then this could happen: In the US there is something called a
compulsory mechanical license which means that if a song has been commercially released anyone can re record that tune as long as they pay the
prescribed mechanical royalty rate of 8.1 cents per unit pressed without asking permission of the original copyright owner so long as the song isn't
being used outside of it's original use. That means that if DKM didn't want their tune used to sell stuff.
The Verve V Rolling Stones is a perfect example of this shit. I have an awesome case study that would blow your minds but this is all I could find
short form on the net:
http://thevervelive.blogspot.com/2005/05/bitter-sweet-sympho...
|
I know you're the teacher here and I'm just the armchair music business participant but you DO have to get permission to record/release someone else's
song. You have to go through the publishing company and gain their permission. Most people (including me) just skirt this and hope the publisher will
never find out but if you're trying to be on-the-level then you need permission. It's been a long ass time since I chummed around with these dudes on
the regular but I distinctly remember them having to seek the permission of the Kingston Trio in order for them to include their version of Charlie on
the MBTA on Do or Die. If you go on publishing websites then you'll see songs that are cleared outright and then you'll also see contact information
for where you have to seek permission and describe what your intentions are to do with the song. It gets more complicated when a band retains the
rights to their publishing because then you gotta get the green light directly from the artist who is more likely to be picky about who they allow to
perform their songs. The Stones authorized the use of their sample to the Verve but then when they heard the results they sued for 100% ownership. So
they basically retracted their authorization.
It's one of the biggest myths in the music business that it's ok to cover someone else's song live or in the studio. People base that off the fact
that it's very hard to get caught. But it is absolutely illegal to record or perform someone else's song live without their express permission. It's
also illegal to use someone's likeness. So all those tribute bands that dress up like the real bands and play their songs and post live versions of
them on MySpace and stuff are violating about a half dozen laws and putting their asses on the line.
|
|
|
Johnny_Whistle
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Registered: 5-26-2010
Location: Location, Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: the voices
|
|
| Quote: | | Originally posted by Mark LindI don't think it's traditional at all. I think it just sounds strikingly familiar and that's why the song has
resonated with so many people. Stuff like it has been done for years. They just got lucky with something vaguely familiar to people that was 100% new.
|
Well that's another thing about traditional irish tunes: a lot of them sound alike. So you might be right about that.
| Quote: | | So all those tribute bands that dress up like the real bands and play their songs and post live versions of them on MySpace and stuff are violating
about a half dozen laws and putting their asses on the line. |
Except for Little Kiss, I think they should get a pass.
|
|
|
barc0debaby
Posting Freak
Posts: 2138
Registered: 3-18-2006
Location: My mom's basement
Member Is Offline
Mood: Punk as Fuck
|
|
| Quote: |
Except for Little Kiss, I think they should get a pass. |
And the Misfats.
|
|
|
Johnny_Whistle
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Registered: 5-26-2010
Location: Location, Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: the voices
|
|
| Quote: | | Originally posted by barc0debabyAnd the Misfats. |
I just peed a little.
|
|
|
jonnynewbreed
Posting Freak
Posts: 1091
Registered: 4-4-2003
Location: Dartmouth, nova scotia
Member Is Offline
Mood: Quite nice actually.
|
|
http://www.artistshousemusic.org/videos/explaining+the+compu...
This does a pretty good job explaining it. I'm certainly not an expert on this subject as I have zero education past High School, just managed to con
my way into the local college as a teacher  .
There are a number of clauses and provisions for mechanical licenses. This does not cover samples.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/thorp/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
