I think a judge would throw that case out before it ever reached any sort of deliberation

 

Since in this instance no infringement was committed at the time, or in the process, of production of the song, there is no way the owner of the rights to the sample can cause that use to become illegal in retrospect. If the terms of a contract (EULA), or the law, seem unclear for a given situation the situation (the case) is to be decided on merit of "good faith". Good faith is the legal equivalent of common sense, in daily life.

If you use something that did not previously "belong" to you, consider whether you "found" it as a someone's property, as in the case of licensed material, whether paid or free, or as an abandoned object, as in the case of truly "public domain", plainly "existing" material. Knowing what and who to pay is a matter of common sense and adhering to that intuition a matter of good faith. Always RTFEULA.

 

Last edited: Nov 2, 2019

To have any claim the "owner of the sample" would have to prove that: the original licence allowed subsequent revocation of the license without repayment of the original license fee, that the owner informed the user in a timely manner of that revocation, and that the use of the sample, that is the moment of recording, occurred after the said revocation of the license in addition to proving before a judge that the sample used in the recording was the sample owner's sample. The jeopardy to the sample owner far outweighs the jeopardy to the sample user of having to carry the litatigation, and all its costs. It would be interesting to see any lawyer willing to try this on.

Secondly, in the case of drum samples, if the above argument could be proven for the plaintiff sample owner, they would have to prove, to the balance of probabilities, the element of uniqueness of their sample and its contribution to the success of the song, in order to make any claim. The real money is in the performing art (songwriting) which does not apply to hitting something. So damages would be limited to a share of the recording rights. All of this heads into loony toon territory unless you're dealing with a) a song that has 3 billion hits on Youtube such as Thinking Out Loud by Ed Sheeran, and b) a drum beat so unique and so special that any normal person could identify it, because for this scale of litigation, you're going before a jury, and, well, most juries are dumb.

 

So what is your opinion on this: an owner of a really long vocal sample sell the sample with a royalty free licence online but then changes his/her mind and stops selling it the next day. If someone who never bought the right to use the sample royalty free when it was sold online, after this takes the sample from some illegal online source and gets a number one hit with it, the owner probably could successfully sue for part of earnings of sales rather than just the cost for the licence fee?

 

A judge would probably throw it out before it even reached deliberation, most judges are not fans of over complicated he said she said squabbles for menial payouts

 

But, the example is not over complicated and does not concern menial payouts.

 

Reminds me of a story that I heard, and with Thanksgiving coming up, quite apropos to your post.

Obie looked at the seein' eye dog then at the twenty-seven 8 x 10
Colored glossy pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the
Back of each one and looked at the seein' eye dog and then at
The twenty-seven 8 x 10 colored glossy pictures with the circles and arrows
And a paragraph on the back of each on and began to cry
Because Obie came to the realization that it was a typical case of American
Blind justice, and there wasn't nothin' he could do about it, and the judge
Wasn't gonna look at the twenty-seven 8 by 10 colored glossy pictures with
The circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explainin'
What each one was, to be used as evidence against us
And we was fined fifty dollars and had to pick up the garbage in the snow

Sample that!

 

So ...if im take a sample from my clock ( tic tac).. and next i do it a conercial song...i must pay to developed clock ? And developed micrphone and deviced that im capture this sample?
If im buy a real syth ( hardware) and im do it comercial songs ( whit this synth) we must pay to developed synth..cause sound designer is the developers.
I do not know how to reach this.
Because if you do it wrong but if a big company does Okay.
I feel that gradually taking over all go...
as in the case of a man who took three buckets of rain,and then they were fined for stealing water.
but the rain is not nobody belongs to nature but someone had licensed the rain

 

You need to work on your metaphores.

 

I have read, that anywhere you go in the word, whether it's a city, village, country, dense population, sparse population, internet forum, etc. etc. etc., on average, about 1/3 of the people are narcs. The definition of narc here being, a person that will "insert" themselves into any situation that has nothing to do with them, and where no one is being harmed, in order to report those persons to authorities because they are "breaking the rules" or "breaking the law". (Or at the very least call them out on it to their faces.)

In my near 50 years, I have found that to be very true.

I am proud to say I am a non narc. Someone is doing something, no one is being harmed or taken advantage of, has nothing to do with me, leave them the fuck alone to live free. Period.

 

Is and not..cause english not is my lenguage. But sure im joking ( not in all ) . If you see...across the time ...everythink that you do it " is ilegal " ...of course , for someone

 

Is and not..cause english not is my lenguage. But sure im joking ( not in all ) . If you see...across the time ...everythink that you do it " is ilegal " ...of course , for someone

 

That's just what a narc would say to infiltrate a group.

There is an old and wisdom laden hippie saying that states, "Always go forward, but never go straight".

 

may I ask, what is your native language?

 

There are some things in place like watermarks and ISRC - so on and so forth.
As to how effective they are, I have no idea, ask a lawyer up with the latest copyright... In VSTi's with samples the EULA with the VSTi generally says what is free and not.
Public Domain, no issues. If you are using something pirated as No Avenger said it's a no brainer. It's illegal to sell it for anything or technically use it other than demoing the product for thirty days unless the laws have changed....technically.
A lawyer is the best person to answer your questions.

 

Sure...i speack spanish. I from Argentina.
¿Hola amigo como estas ?
Era matafora y no lo era. En cierta forma se van poniendo cada vez mas barreras y todo es el por el dinero. Esto lo digo por los samples mas que nada....alguein toma una muestra y otro lo registra a su nombre.