Well so far it actually seems like it’s going good. According to the fine print on the license itself, the music groups can’t revoke the rights.

Usually when there’s a famous song and a famous artist they put their songs under content ID. Which means like using the example of the acapella from SZA That I paid for that turned out to be illegal…. The system recognizes the song when it uploads it. We had the same discussion on the AI songs. Like as an example, Hasbro pays for content ID on the Transformers opening theme. I know because I tested it LOL.

So it doesn’t appear that the record label is paying for content ID on ” What u sittin on?”

I’ve uploaded it and all the automated system wanted to verify from me is that I have the right to use the artist CeeLo Green. That’s 100% a sign that the content ID isn’t enabled.

coruscate,

It took some digging, but I was able to determine that you *definitely* have the right to use anything from the track: “What U Sittin’ On?” by Danger Mouse & Jemini.
I trust discogs.com in their accuracy for copyright information and further confirmed it:
Wired: Rip. Sample. Mash. Share.

This may be something you already know, but if someone else is reading about/researching this matter, the entire purpose of the CD that Wired magazine released, as well as the uploads it submitted here was to be remixed in anyway the remixer chose.
In this particular case, commercial use is allowed only if you “sample, mash-up, or otherwise creatively transform this work.”

In regards to your original point, reinforcing the validity of Wired Magazine’s license on their website is an *excellent* suggestion.
However, it has been *quite* awhile since this contest took place, which made me uncertain about your statement: “Artist-Tech [sic] media actually has more ties to Wired than I ever realized.”
Not to be disrespectful, but what led you to that conclusion?
I only ask because it will help me research this matter further.
Either way, I intend to bring this to the attention of our admin team—I think something like this is pertinent to ccMixter’s legacy.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

Kind regards,
Apoxode

Oh by the ties comment, I didn’t realize that they helped found CCmixter. Since it’s been 20 years they may no longer be involved at all but…

And it worked!

I suspect that your discogs link help push it over 😎 But yeah, it’s on the way to stores and my megamix will be up on streaming for the day of the secret mixter event

I don’t have confirmation of this, but it is my theory that in order to satisfy the legal requirements to transform the work that the title be changed.

coruscate,

It worked? Fantastic!
It’s a mind-melter to imagine what the music world was like in 2004 :)

Quick question about something you said:
“I don’t have confirmation of this, but it is my theory that in order to satisfy the legal requirements to transform the work that the title be changed.”

Are you referring to the terms of the Sampling Plus license?
If so, it’s referring to the content of the work—renaming something only transforms the name, lol ;)

Congrats on all of your recent success, btw—no rest for the wicked ;)

Kind regards,
Apoxode

Information rant incoming LOL

So let’s start with our word “remix.” I can’t use that word on streaming in any capacity, it triggers either an automatic rejection from DistroKid and or multiple rejections from other stores. Stores, by the way, means Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, YouTube, etc. etc. so “store” means each and every streaming service whether you can buy my music or not. “Remix” is synonymous with “some random person remixing a famous singer having no clue they can’t do that.” Doesn’t matter if I’m remixing myself or someone else, it’s automatic.

But at the same time…

…I’ve discovered through using licensed celebrity acapellas, DistroKid / the stores only check to verify that I have the right to use an artist work if they have somewhere between 500,000 and 1 million listeners a month. Anyone else? I could literally tag them in songs they are not involved in at all, or even illegally remix and actually get away with it if content ID is not turned on. Case in point, the rapper Method Man has been having an ongoing legal battle over getting an illegal remix removed from streaming. He’s one of those artists that they don’t check before posting his work.

When I uploaded a remix of “What U Sittin On” featuring CeeLo Green, Tash, J-Ro and Jemini The Gifted One the only artist they asked me to verify was CeeLo Green. The other three celebrities aren’t considered popular enough to receive that protection.

On the plus side, it makes it easier for indy artists to feature each other. I was able to Feature Snowflake on that and few other tracks easily.

But at the same time… you could upload your own music to youtube, use your own music in your own video on your own channel and catch a copyright violation. Meta (Facebook) is having similar problems.

What I’m getting at is it’s kind of Wild West out there with oddball, selectively enforced rules.

Comparing this license
Sampling+

to
Attribution By 4.0


You should notice the Sampling+ license doesn’t say anything about remixes. I think that’s critical. It says we can sample, mash-up or otherwise creatively transform. So I think we are required to do more than just remix it. I think we can leave the vocals in tact, as long as it’s brought into a bigger work that can be clearly shown to not be a remix.

I have a vocal song called “ Just A Fun Rhyme For Saturday Night” it was inspired by the one I posted here years ago, but new lyrics and a feature. I think I’ll combine the two songs from now on and that will be my defense if they ever knock on my door. It’ll be a six minute song with two full songs embedded and you have to go through one full song before you get to Wired acapella. That’s going to be my strategy with other songs, since I hard milk celebrity features for streams (read: Dozens of remixes). I’m going to talk to Lone Wolf who is in that song and see if he won’t allow that acapella to be be posted here. He’s having a kid and hyped on the idea of having little ads for his fiverr gig (paying him to rap) on the upload page. If I can pull that off I’ll spit out a two-mix remix kit to demonstrate exactly what I mean with some new pellas. Give me a bit, I have a song about to pass 20k, a feature with Ghostface Killa but it’s my highest rated song to date. Lone Wolf already okayed sharing the acapella he’s currently making for that, I haven’t even heard it yet. I should be getting it soon.

( How it is it that high without being done? I released a test song as a “CD Single” bonus and it went absolute bonkers )

Randomish: For me, I upload two albums a month usually with 20 tracks and since most songs are vocal I’ve got to add like 3-5 features per song and hand type out the names in the song credits…

…and the more features I put in the more my computer chokes on speed typing speed… by track 10 computer can no longer live update the text on the “feature” and “version” field because it’s sucking too much memory. By the time I get to track 20 I’m cutting and pasting info from a second window.

…I don’t know who inputs those 60+ track listings for CCmixter albums but hats off holy cow that’s some patience.

Don’t ever make that person mad.

Dangerous levels of patience lol

It’s a team effort no doubt :)
Hard enough to compile a spreadsheet, they also need to be adapted to the distributor, lol.

Cool!