4 ms·
"More Spell On You" was actually produced by Daniel Vangarde (a.k.a Thomas Bangalter's father). It might be the reason why Daft Punk were able to avoid legal co
by bbx 13y ago
"More Spell On You" was actually produced by Daniel Vangarde (a.k.a Thomas Bangalter's father). It might be the reason why Daft Punk were able to avoid legal complications.
- delinka 13y agoWhy do people assume there would be "legal complications?" Why the assumption that they just took what they wanted without licensing? They're not obligated to inform us about these arrangements, the licensor has no interest in disclosing what its licensee is up to, and the licensee can say (or not say) whatever it wants.
- KC8ZKF 13y agoTFA says "More Spell On You" was cleared.
- halter73 13y agoNo need to be rude. The video itself implies that the sample wasn't cleared. I wouldn't expect everyone who saw this post to watch the video AND read the whole thing. Still, you're right of course.
- KC8ZKF 13y agoRude?
- WiseWeasel 13y agoYes, surprisingly, using an acronym like "The Fucking Article" might be construed as rude in certain circles.
- phpnode 13y agoThe Featured Article
- sthatipamala 13y agoTFA often means "the full article", even though the more rude sense is more common elsewhere.
- arrrg 13y agoI’m sorry, but you cannot use “TFA” without implying “The fucking article” at least to some degree. That’s just how it is, never mind the intent. If you want to be polite you do not use “TFA”, it’s as simple as that.
- gotofritz 13y agoor you could give the poster the benefit of the doubt and read it as "the featured article". It's your decision how you decide to read it.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- shawabawa3 13y agoDo you actually need any kind of licensing or permission to sample 10 seconds of a song? Especially when the end result sounds nothing like the original
- tomphoolery 13y agoYes, you do. Legally speaking. Which means if the song makes money and is popular, and your samples aren't covered, you can get fucked hardcore. Regardless of how long the sample is.
- tomphoolery 13y agoThat makes sense, as to why they didn't need to publicly disclose use of the sample. Still licensed, just not publicly disclosed. There are a few other tracks off Discovery that are like that.