By Ace Vincent, Go2Tutors | Music sampling has been a cornerstone of creativity in hip-hop, pop, and electronic music for decades. Taking snippets of existing songs and weaving them into new compositions can create magic—but it can also create legal nightmares. When artists forget to clear their samples or can’t get permission, the original creators often come knocking with lawyers in tow.
The legal landscape around sampling changed forever in 1991 when a federal judge ruled that using any portion of someone else’s music without permission constitutes copyright infringement. This decision sent shockwaves through the music industry and made sample clearance a crucial—and expensive—part of the creative process.
Here is a list of musicians who learned the hard way that borrowing beats can come with a hefty price tag.
‘U Can’t Touch This’ made Hammer a household name and won him multiple Grammy Awards, but Rick James wasn’t thrilled about the unauthorized use of his ‘Super Freak’ bassline. James sued and the case was settled with James receiving not only money but also a songwriting credit.
Ironically, this meant James won the only Grammy of his career in 1991 for co-writing ‘U Can’t Touch This.’ The settlement also entitled James to ongoing royalties, making him a very rich man thanks to Hammer’s massive hit.
> > > > > > > > >
Go here to read more:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/musicians-sued-for-sampling-hits/
Some of the reasons a lawsuit was filed:
. . . even unreleased songs can land you in legal trouble when . . . sampled . . .
Citing Egyptian ‘moral rights’ laws, . . .
[He] also faced separate lawsuits over samples used in other tracks, showing that clearing every sample is crucial for even critically acclaimed artists.
. . . he actually tried to do the right thing by getting permission to use a young girl’s prayer, but contacted the wrong parents—her biological mother instead of her adoptive parents who held the legal rights.
The victory was significant because it showed that not all sampling cases end in expensive settlements.
The case highlighted how complex music rights can be — [company] owned just 3.15% of the rights to [song] but still had standing to sue.
The case was eventually settled in 2009, proving that there’s no statute of limitations on sampling disputes.
The band claimed … song infringed on their 2017 track . . . number two on the . . . charts. The case raised questions about access and intention . . .
The evolution of sampling lawsuits tells the story of how music, technology, and law intersect in the digital age. . . . Today’s artists face the choice between paying potentially massive clearance fees upfront or risking even more massive lawsuits later .
Musicians Sued for Sampling Hits
