3 ms·

> If you believe in music copyrights at all, this looks like an open and shut case of infringement to me. There are some that truly don't believe that sampling

> If you believe in music copyrights at all, this looks like an open and shut case of infringement to me. There are some that truly don't believe that sampling copyrights should be a thing. They think it's just a way to stifle creativity. One could also argue that Dreams is so completely derivative that is bears little to no resemblance to the original recording it samples, and as such does not infringe on any intellectual property. > Plus "Dreams" is a godawful piece of music You opinions on a piece have no legal bearing on what does or does not constitute copyright infringement. The comment was completely unnecessary and uncalled for.

microtherion 7y ago
> There are some that truly don't believe that sampling copyrights should be a thing That's why I said "if". > One could also argue that Dreams is so completely derivative that is bears little to no resemblance to the original recording That's not what "derivative" means. > You opinions on a piece have no legal bearing on what does or does not constitute copyright infringement. Maybe not, but in light of your general point about "stifling creativity", it might be worth pointing out that this is hardly a good piece to highlight said creativity.