Potential risks of using one-shots from old sample CDs?

[Dogged]

Hi all,

I could use some feedback on this. I do a lot of library work in various dance and electronic genres, and my production workflow in those genres is built in part around the use of samples from large, well-known sample CDs and DVDs that I’ve purchased over the years. I want to stress that I *exclusively* use one-shot samples, no pre-made loops or beds. I also want to stress that every single samplepack I use explicitly comes with a license granting unlimited royalty-free use in any and all music productions.

Given all of that, one would think I should be fine, but here’s what gives me pause. In many cases, the one-shots I’m using are of fairly distinctive and famous sounds. Listening to my tracks, anyone who’s well-versed in these genres will be able to spot and identify specific classic drum hits, chord stabs, vocal yelps, etc. I’m not naïve enough to think that the producers of all of my sample CDs went to the trouble of clearing all of these, despite each CD explicitly carrying a licensing agreement guaranteeing me the ability to use the samples commercially. In theory, then, it seems entirely possible that someone may eventually hear one of my tracks in a library, recognize a particular one-shot that comes from a famous source, and report me to the library for using a potentially uncleared sample–and they might technically even be right to do so, despite the fact that I’ve purchased everything legitimately and am following all associated licensing agreements to the letter.

If such a thing were to happen, given how leery libraries can be of anything that carries even the slightest whiff of copyright danger, I’m afraid that my entire catalogue with the library receiving the report, and possibly even with other libraries, might suddenly be at risk. Even if I were only asked to remove tracks with the particular offending sample, that could amount to quite a few tracks, and I’d then be worried that a second report on a different sample in some other track might finish me with that library for good. I’m sure most libraries have limited tolerance for this sort of thing.

However, all of these concerns are entirely theoretical, as I’ve never actually heard of anyone having problems with this. Thus, I come to you fine folks with a question: ever heard of this being a problem? Basically, I would like to know if anyone has any actual examples of this issue coming up, and how much of a problem I should generally expect it to be. It would be a terrible shame for me to have to abandon the massive collection of one-shot libraries I’ve purchased over so many years, but I will do it if using them really does mean playing with fire.

Thanks in advance for any and all insights on this.

[StevieBlunder]

You raise some valid points and this has occurred to me also. I’ve seen pretty clear evidence that Zero G used the infamous Amen break in a few of their cd’s in their early days and it was never cleared. I wouldnt doubt that they used other samples and didnt clear them. I get the feeling that standards are different these days but I’m currently going through older songs with this in mind.

I have no idea what the ramifications of one being spotted would be however

[MichaelL]

Zero G even registered, or tried to register, a copyright for the 6-second break that they didn’t create.

And yes, “creativity endures”…

http://networkawesome.com/mag/article/you-amen-break-it-you-amen-buy-it/

…at the expense of the creator/drummer who died homeless, while others cashed in.

http://www.factmag.com/2015/02/19/give-something-back-one-men-behind-amen-break/

Remember, if these are older sample libraries they may have been created at a time when the libraries were naive about the legalities.

The fact that Coleman and Spencer never pursued legal action explains the prevalence of the Amen break without litigation. Following “Blurred Lines,” however, I think that the environment is differnt. Estates of deceased artists will readily pursue action against infringers (which would include samplers).

@Dogged, the answer to your question really depends on what is in the contract betwwen you and the sample libraries. I’ve read one EULA, from a well-known sample library, in which they shifted liability to the buyer.

The same goes for production music libraries. Virtually all of them ban uncleared samples and require that you indemnify them against legal claims.

If a library discovers that you are using uncleared samples they will most likely drop you and you will be responsible for defending any legal actions against the library should claims arise.

Michael

[Michael Nickolas]

It is tricky. A typical license agreement gives you the right to use the sounds for commercial purposes within musical compositions, then the next paragraph says the sounds are licensed “as is” without warranties of any kind! I bought a saxophone sample product just recently and heard the melody of a famous jazz standard in some of the loops.

It would be a shame for a library to drop a composer who did everything correctly. The composer shopped and paid for content, and received a license to use the sounds commercially. What more can we do?

I guess it comes down to trust. It sounds like you don’t trust that the content is actually legal, so you need to either verify with the company providing the license that yes it is a 100% legal sample or don’t use it. I don’t trust the sax product now, and maybe any other product put out by the company.

Eventually, we have to create and need content to do so. How does that saying go – “Trust but verify” or something like that.

[Dogged]

MichaelL: Thank you for that typically cogent and thorough legal analysis. I can’t say I was surprised by any of it, of course. It’s fairly obvious that, strictly in a de jure legalistic sense, the burden with this kind of thing is going to fall entirely on the producer of the track. My interest here is in how likely it is to become an issue in practice in the particular kinds of situations under consideration here, and in how library owners and staff tend to approach this often-fuzzy area of concern, both in terms of how they’ll react pre-emptively upon recognizing famous one-shots, and how they’ll react upon receiving notice of a potentially uncleared use of such a sound.

Michael Nickolas: I’m not using any loops, but the situation you mention is also very relevant here, so thanks for bringing that up. In fact, I’d imagine that this same issue must be ten times worse for those who do use loops, given that an uncleared melody in a loop will be *vastly* more recognizable to the casual listener than an uncleared one-shot might be. Obviously, you’re right about trust. Unfortunately, very few vendors of samplepacks have the kind of extensive, profoundly impressive track record that would justify a truly firm level of trust. To make matters worse, I’m not sure how one can “verify” this sort of thing with the company providing the samples/loops. If the license agreement clearly states that the samples were cleared for commercial use–and that will of course be the case for any high-quality samplepack product that most of us would want to use–then isn’t it a given that the spokespeople for the company will mindlessly reaffirm that if questioned?

Indeed, the thing that’s throwing me for a loop here, and the reason I felt compelled to start this thread, is that I can’t think of any actual way to verify such things. It’s all well and good to say “don’t use famous one-shots or loops with recognizable melodies if you want to be on the safe side”, but the really scary part is that none of us are going to be able to do a perfect job, 100% of the time, of *knowing* which one-shots or melodies are in fact recognizable. Michael’s sax product is a perfect example here. Thankfully, he recognized that jazz melody–but what if he hadn’t? How can we feel safe using *any* of the samples or soundbanks we’ve purchased, particularly loops with prominent melodies, given that there are known to be all manner of uncleared bits and pieces floating around in many of those products, and no apparent way to actually double check this? That’s why I’ve been holding out hope that libraries might tend to be understanding when confronted with possible instances of this sort of thing, and not just drop the hammer immediately, and I’d be interested to see if folks here can confirm or deny that.

[Michael Nickolas]

Right, we can’t do a 100% perfect job. So my take is we have do the best that we can and be satisfied with that. In your case, that might mean not using samples that you’re questioning, like I didn’t use the sax loop. But we all need to use content and can’t question every single thing. If a situation ever did come up, I’d hope the library would recognize if a composer took all possible measures to act honestly, and then themselves act understandingly. I mean in this day of blatant music thieves stealing full tracks and passing them off as their own, why dump an honest composer because of something they had no control over?

[SempreLegato]

Hi Dogged,

You state:

“In many cases, the one-shots I’m using are of fairly distinctive and famous sounds. Listening to my tracks, anyone who’s well-versed in these genres will be able to spot and identify specific classic drum hits, chord stabs, vocal yelps, etc. ”

Since you are asking for advice, mine is that you should avoid using sounds that “anyone who’s well-versed in these genres will be able to spot and identify” unless you are very confident that they have been licensed properly. I guess an obvious exception would be if the sound in question is something like one TR-808 kick drum sample; the machine was made to be recorded.

It’s not worth the risk to include questionable sounds, in my opinion. You may be asking about what repercussions you might face for using them, or, conversely, how likely you are to avoid any repercussions, but, to me, the fact that you have flagged the sounds as identifiable and unreliably sourced means that on some level you already know that you should avoid using them. Michael Nickolas is not using the sax loop in question.

I’m not trying to criticize you; I’m just stating my opinion. I think it’s a good question and I’m glad that you asked it.

[Author]

Posts