Jump to content

saila.com

Online media matters

Home
Blog
Blogmarks
Topics

Living Can Kill You

Grey Tuesday

Can art be illegal?

Category: Attic
Topic: Web Culture
Date: Feb. 24, 2004
Comments: 8

Comments

MikeyC said:

Sampling short snippets of someone else's material to create something new may be legit, though I'm not sure how I feel about The Grey Album. I've been listening to it for about a week now and while it is fun and interesting to listen to, I can see why Jay-Z/The Beatles/their record companies would want to sue. We're not talking about short snippet samples here, we are talking about entire beatles choruses and entire Jay-Z vocal tracks lifted directly with little alteration. I'm not sure simply calling something "art" is a free pass to do whatever you want. If I were to take Catcher In The Rye and change it to Catcher In The Pumpernickel and resell it, would that be alright if it's in the name of "art"?

Feb. 24 2004 at 08:55 a.m. EDT
Craig Saila said:

Well, from my understanding, Jay-Z essentially condoned such remixes by releasing a vocal-only version of the Black Album. And except for the hard-core Beatlemaniac, people would be challenged to identify the source material of the samples were it not so promoted. "Catcher In The Pumpernickel" it is not. But to follow that tangent, is "West Side Story" not art because it is a reworking of "Romeo and Juliet"? In fact, is "Romeo and Juliet" not art because it itself is a reworking of "Mariotto and Gianozza"? Art has always been "inspired" by works that came before it -- be they retellings of history ("Iliad" [a widely "stolen" work]) or drawn from cultural touchstones (e.g., passion plays, Warhol) -- and it has only been recently that copyright created a legal quagmire for such works.

Feb. 24 2004 at 05:49 p.m. EDT
MikeyC said:

Craig: "And except for the hard-core Beatlemaniac, people would be challenged to identify the source material of the samples were it not so promoted." ...Craig, I'm not so sure about this. I would say that even a casual Beatles fan (even a casual music fan) would be able to recognize a number of the samples. You can even hear Lennon vocals on a couple tracks. My point is that these are not short samples reworked. A number of full melodies/choruses are intact including Lennon vocals (one of the most identifiable rock voices around).... Craig: "West Side Story" not art because it is a reworking of "Romeo and Juliet"? .... I'd say that it's alright because Shakespeare's works have passed into the public domain. Sampling the Beatles a few hundred years from now is the equivalent IMHO, although I think works should pass into the public domain in a shorter period of time than currently.

Feb. 24 2004 at 07:42 p.m. EDT
Jason said:

MikeyC: I'd say that it's alright because Shakespeare's works have passed into the public domain. Sampling the Beatles a few hundred years from now is the equivalent
Isn't that the whole point of Grey Tuesday? That the time it takes for a work to reach the public domain is far too long? And that if you "substantially" alter something, it can be considered that you have created something new?
I admit of course, that ones definition of "substantially" altering something is subject to an enormous amount of leeway in interpretation.
That said, I would say that the Grey Album is at least as different as the White Album as the movie "Vice Versa" is to "Big," and IMHO moreso.

Feb. 24 2004 at 07:59 p.m. EDT
MikeyC said:

Maybe my love of the Beatles music is clouding my judgement, but the Beatles samples do not appear to be "substantially" different to me. A number of them sound like they were lifted directly from the White Album with very little alteration. ... Jason:"Isn't that the whole point of Grey Tuesday?"... If the contention is that works should pass into the public domain sooner then I'm all for that, but what I don't agree with is that calling something "art" is a "free pass" of sorts. If that's the case then I should be able to take Britney Spears' In The Zone album, add a snoring track in the background, call it "art" and release it on my own. hmmm...

Feb. 24 2004 at 08:19 p.m. EDT
Craig Saila said:

I know the songs from the White Album, and I've listened to the Grey Album, and with the exception of a few songs, I would never have been able to isolate the samples.
Sampling is just a modern equivalent to what the early gospel, jazz, blues, and rock and roll has always done: taken melodies and musical moments from one song and blended it into another.
Even the Beatles did this -- it, too, used the technology of the time to sample someone's music (money allowed the members to travel and record Indian musicians and release those sounds to a Western audience). Did the Beatles make art? The establishment of the time would say no, most now would say yes.
By declaring the Grey Album illegal, and trying prevent its distribution now, the copyright enforcers attempted to prevent the society of forty years from now from determining the artistic merits of DJ Danger Mouse's piece.
Will it be anything more than a footnote? Hard to say, but it deserves the right to be judged.

Feb. 25 2004 at 08:12 a.m. EDT
MikeyC said:

I guess the problem I'm having with the whole matter is this: where is the line between "influence" and "plagarism" drawn? Some would say even short, unrecognizeable snippets of music cross the line, others say short snippets are fine but works like the Grey Album cross the line. Because we are dealing with "art" can we really have an arbiter of what is "art" and what is "plagarism"? If the Grey deserves the right to be judged then I should be able to take the White album, add an extra drum snare in the background and be given the same consideration. The slippery slope argument I admit, but how can you really avoid blatant plagarism as such if "art" under no circumstance can be "illegal".

Feb. 25 2004 at 09:03 a.m. EDT
Craig Saila said:

MickeyC: "how can you really avoid blatant plagarism as such if 'art' under no circumstance can be 'illegal'." You can't, but in the end, it's the quality of the work that matters. And some seem to like it: http://www.suntimes.com/output/rock/cst-ftr-grey25.html

Feb. 25 2004 at 11:26 a.m. EDT

Also of Interest

Some Related.

Web award deadlines; Elm Street falls

Category
Attic

Topics

Web Culture, Magazine

Date
Jan. 9, 2004 at 12:00 a.m. EDT
Cutting the new media fund; best bloggin practices; Opera 7.20 out; P2P to the rescue;

Category
Attic

Topics

Web Culture, Online Journalism

Date
Sep. 24, 2003 at 12:00 a.m. EDT

Comments
2
Advertising lite; Canadian media growth

Category
Attic

Topics

Web Culture, Journalism

Date
Jun. 12, 2003 at 12:00 a.m. EDT
25dates.com; Cashets; Guerilla News

Category
Attic

Topics

Web Culture, Online Journalism

Date
Oct. 30, 2002 at 12:00 a.m. EDT
Online banking taking off

Category
Attic

Topics

Web Culture, Radio

Date
Jul. 9, 2002 at 12:00 a.m. EDT

Comments
2

This Just In

Some Web Culture Posts.

Don't be a free user

Reference
blog.pinboard.in

Topics

Web Culture, Subscriptions & Registration

Date
Dec. 7, 2011 at 9:29 a.m. EDT
HoHoTO 2011 tickets on sale

Reference
hohoto.ca

Topics

Toronto, Web Culture

Date
Nov. 15, 2011 at 4:18 p.m. EDT

This Just In

Some Attic Posts.

Building a bridge

Category
Attic

Topic

Toronto

Date
May 17, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. EDT
A year (almost) in photos

Category
Attic

Topic

Personal

Date
Feb. 11, 2011 at 8:21 a.m. EDT

This Just In

Some Living Can Kill You Posts.

Community is not another buzzword

Category
Journalism

Topics

Online Journalism, Social Media

Date
May 24, 2011 at 6:51 p.m. EDT

Comment
1
Reading and paying for news

Category
Journalism

Topics

Newspapers, Subscriptions & Registration

Date
Mar. 30, 2011 at 5:55 p.m. EDT

1996 – 2014, Craig Saila. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. ISSN 1496-3035. You may also be interested in reading Saila’s Miscellany Follow @saila

Jump to navigation