{shortcode-59d7f934d605387ad9c014757428eef3a2abc93d}

Sampling has become hugely popular in the music industry, and its ability to inspire inventive tracks has earned it the respect of artists and critics alike. However, the outdated nature of the laws governing sampling as well as widespread ignorance or interpretation of these laws has landed numerous artists in hot water and stands to hinder future innovation.

For all of the critiques that detractors love to hurl his way, Kanye West is not often accused of unoriginality. Neither does his name frequently find itself preceding the words “is representative of” unless the phrase that follows is also “Kanye West.” However, rap’s most publicized (but not only) self-styled god has recently found himself embroiled in a controversy in which both of these labels have been appended to him. In December, West was sued by former child star Ricky Spicer for unauthorized use of Spicer’s track “Bound” in West’s recent “Bound 2.” According to Spicer, West  not only neglected to navigate the proper legal channels to obtain usage of “Bound,” but also failed to let Spicer know after the fact that he had used his track.

The jury is still out on West’s innocence, but his latest legal troubles are representative of a longstanding trend in the music industry: sampling.

Sampling is the process of reconstituting pieces of one artist’s pre-existing music for use in another artist’s new track. Disreputable as the concept may sound, it is immensely popular and can be completely legal. Sampling has gained the approval of artists and critics alike, and at Harvard, professors and students with a stake in the conversation are varied in the specifics of their opinions but united in the notion that there is real value in the practice. But while the artistic community sees sampling as an innovative device that should be continued, the law has lagged behind, creating a legal gray area that interferes with artistic innovation.

MUSICAL SNARES

The labyrinthine nature of the laws surrounding sampling is well illustrated by the history of Michael Jackson’s monumental  “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’.”

{shortcode-05068ca924a8cc058dcab0a6159ba52162dfd378}

That seminal funk-pop track famously ends with the nonsense chant “mama-say mama-sa mama-ku-sa.”  As it turns out, the chant did not originate with the King of Pop. It was borrowed from a song by Cameroonian saxophonist Manu Dibango. Jackson modified the original Duala of Dibango’s lyrics to create his characteristic earworm chant of nonsense words. However, Jackson did not do this without obtaining official approval from Dibango and paying him a hefty sum. Years later, pop star Rihanna wanted to pay homage to one of her own musical inspirations and contacted Jackson seeking approval to use his version of the chant in her track “Don’t Stop the Music.”

{shortcode-147f89453f1c83b50f35604c24f16e501796f9d6}

Jackson approved, but the Barbadian songstress soon found herself blindsided by litigation when Dibango sued her and Jackson for unauthorized use. While Rihanna got Jackson’s approval to use his version of the chant, which differed from Dibango’s original, Dibango held that Jackson did not have the legal standing to assent to Rihanna’s usage. The case was settled out of court, and Dibango received an undisclosed settlement.

{shortcode-954d1b825b163457da75a311f363af1f3c635efc}