February 27, 2006 4:00 AM PST

'Copyright criminals' look to remix the noise--legally

When Paul Miller, aka DJ Spooky, says he thinks musicians should be able to remix samples of others' clips into new works, he puts his money where his mouth is.

Miller is part of a group of musicians including Public Enemy's Chuck D; Parliament Funkadelic's George Clinton; and the band De La Soul who are allowing the public to mash up audio snippets from interviews they've given into submissions for a new remixing competition.

The Copyright Criminals Remix Contest, which is sponsored by the nonprofit copyright licensing organization Creative Commons, is all about promoting remixing culture and encouraging artists like Miller to make their work legally and affordably available for other musicians to manipulate.

Creative Commons has built a licensing system that allows content creators to decide which usage rights to their work to grant others. In every case, the licenses require attribution to the creator. Some allow users to manipulate licensed work for any non-commercial purpose, while others don't. The ultimate point is to faciliate copyrights that are flexible on which rights users get.

"Sampling has become what kids do," Miller said. "Because of that, I find more and more electronic music is a reflection of urban culture wherever you go, and to me it was really important to have not just a statement about it, but to participate in the process."

The interviews given by Miller and the other musicians were for a documentary called "Copyright Criminals" by Atlanta artist Ben Franzen and Kembrew McLeod, an assistant professor of communications studies at the University of Iowa. For their film about the rise of sampling and remix culture, the two talked to musicians, artists, lawyers, scholars, music industry executives and others.

The film is being made in the context of a legal landscape in which professional musicians are well aware that they have to pay to use pieces of other artists' songs. The RIAA has been steadfast in its desire to keep musicians from freely appropriating elements of others' work, and liberal sampling that might have passed muster a decade or so ago is now fodder for cease-and-desist letters.

Listen up

Listen to "Whatever," a track created by Tru Ski and entered in the Copyright Criminals Contest.
Listen now... (3.7MB mp3)

In choosing the topic for "Copyright Criminals," McLeod and Franzen are challenging that dynamic. They believe creativity is better served by letting artists borrow from others. And Creative Commons, with its licenses, believes it is providing an environment that protects artists' rights while still making it possible for musicians and others to sample previous work.

McLeod and Franzen eventually made a 10-minute trailer of their film available online, and just days later, someone posted a rap song about the film on the Creative Commons community remixing project site, CCMixter.

Inspired by the unsolicited rap, the two men decided to organize a contest and began to encourage pubic submissions of new songs made from elements of the interviews shown in the film trailer.

"It's fun to play with stuff, and when you have the opportunity to play with George Clinton's voice, or Chuck D's voice or DJ Spooky's voice, it's a great thing," said McLeod. "Appropriation, the remixing of digital sounds, or what Shakespeare did...the instinct to appropriate cuts across all forms of creativity. And the point of the contest and the film is to encourage (people) to do it more, and to legitimize the impulse."

Miller agrees, and argues that the record industry would do well to recognize that it has a gigantic repository of archival material that if put in the hands of remixers could be used for substantial financial advantage.

"It's almost a no-brainer that if they're sitting on material, they're not making any money," said Miller. "What they should do is activate their archives and encourage this kind of thinking."

Miller will also be releasing a film soon, "Rebirth of a Nation," which he'll let the public remix under a Creative Commons license.

The Copyright Criminals contest is open for all submissions until March 14. The winner will have his or her song featured "prominently" in McLeod and Franzen's documentary.

CONTINUED: The cost of being Kanye West…
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
musician, artist, contest, culture, interview


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Copyright theft, when the courts have always upheld the right to free speech and parody!

Oh well, let the innovators win, for without them, we will have a booring world, with the clone sound-a-like the major labels and others in the powers to be, would foist upon us all!

Vive la revolution!
Posted by heystoopid (691 comments )
Reply Link Flag
proofread please
Have any of you guys ever given any pubic submissions?
Posted by talus7 (15 comments )
Link Flag
As a composer and musician, I find the use of "musician" in referring to remixers as an insult. It takes no musical training to "remix". Also, taking the work of others without their permisiion is stealing, and wrong. It doesn't matter what you might want. Just because you WANT something doesn't mean you have ANY right to just take it. "Urban culture" glorifies the worst in human behaviour, and should not be used as a standard to live by.
Posted by gearpig (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Am I raising little criminals?
My kids are "sampling" all the time. They are not creating music, but they do create images by copying what they find using Google, and they create games using images and sounds thay take wherever they can find it. They don't chack for "legality" and they don't care about it. To them it seems natuaral that they can use whatever they can find. Tehey are focused on their creations. With my 11 years old I discussed this subject (the trigger was a background image in one of the games he programmed. He didn't remember where it came from except that it was found using Google images, and we couldn't find the same picture again, or any image that could replace it. It's not a problem if it stays at home, but that particular game was good enough to distribute to friends, and that got me thinking about what happens if it gets distributed too widely and one of the copyright sharks decides to sue. Am I paranoid? I have my kids' future to worry about. Eventually he decided it worked better with a black backgroung.)

My 5 years old kid copies stuff from Google images to MS Paint all the time. He cannot be taught about copyrights at his age, and I prefer not to limit his creativity. Am I raising little criminals?

It would be helpful if I could set Google search on my Kids' computers to show only CC licensed images, but I suspect this would produce very little results so eventually it would go unused if I want not to limit their creativity.
Posted by hadaso (468 comments )
Reply Link Flag
um it's not creativity to take other people's stuff.
Posted by landonpt (1 comment )
Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.