Latest on MJJC

Timbaland: THEFT!

AGB said:
As I said before a person owns the copyright in something as soon as they create it. It is their choice whether they wish to assign copyright to another individual or not. However initially copyright always belongs to the person who creates the material unless there is already some contract that says otherwise. Timbaland is still in breach of copyright though because somebody owns the copyright in the original work either it be the creators or somebody else.

As for work being in the public domain, a work only enters the public domain after a long period of time, copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. Therefore Timbaland cannot argue that someone's work was in the public domain unless it was created 100 years ago lol.

There is no such thing as official copyright or non-official copyright. Copyright is copyright. If it can be proved that someobody has taken another person's expression of an idea then it is breach of copyright.
Click to expand...

alright. thanks for clearing that up. i guess mtv better not hold anymore contests featuring original bands, cus their contest practices are suspect, then.
 
vncwilliam said:
alright. thanks for clearing that up. i guess mtv better not hold anymore contests featuring original bands, cus their contest practices are suspect, then.
Click to expand...

Your welcome :). These MTV contests usually stipulate that the creator loses copyright so when somebody submists a piece of work to them then they automatically assign they copyright to MTV. I find that a little bit unfair because they normally state it in extremely small print and those that are not familiar with copyright law do not always know what they are getting themselves into.
 
Last edited:
I know he's had little lawsuites on him etc.. but I really want it to be big..

see the thing is he's a little under the raidar with stealing.. He changes JUST enough to not be the same.. He adds and takes stuff out..

that's how he's been able to get away with it so long..

for example here.. He only used the strings, and created all these other things around it..

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ORsHlKSyvBo&feature=related


He loves taking other cultures music and putting into his beats... Cuz he thinks, how in the hell are these people WAY over there gonna find out.. lol! He takes from other types of music but he favors arab instramentals.


and this is what he just says about 'sample' shoooot!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JTvY3wZrHrQ&feature=related
 
KOPV said:
I know he's had little lawsuites on him etc.. but I really want it to be big..

see the thing is he's a little under the raidar with stealing.. He changes JUST enough to not be the same.. He adds and takes stuff out..

that's how he's been able to get away with it so long..

for example here.. He only used the strings, and created all these other things around it..

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ORsHlKSyvBo&feature=related


He loves taking other cultures music and putting into his beats... Cuz he thinks, how in the hell are these people WAY over there gonna find out.. lol! He takes from other types of music but he favors arab instramentals.


and this is what he just says about 'sample' shoooot!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JTvY3wZrHrQ&feature=related
Click to expand...

Yeah copyright theft is a tricky area in terms of the threshold as to what constitutes copying. The law requires that there be a significant part to be replicated for their to copyright theft. However the significant part does not relate to the amount as such but more towards the quality of the part taken. If the part that Timbaland has taken from someone's work is qualitatively significant to that original work and he has not made a significant material change then what he has done will be classified as breach of copyright.
 
Last edited:
AGB said:
Yeah copyright theft is a tricky area in terms of the threshold as to what constitutes copying. The law requires that there be a significant part to be replicated for their to copyright theft. However the significant part does not relate to the amount as such but more towards the quality of the part taken. If the part that Timbaland has taken from someone's work is qualitatively significant to that original work and he has not made a significant material change then what he has done will be classified as breach of copyright.
Click to expand...


now..see that's where either u or the government are starting to sound murky. do u realize what a high priced lawyer can do with that info?

by the way..timbaland just slipped, speechwise, from saying 'i don't know' to..'MAYBE i don't know if it's in the public domain or not.' then he uses time pressure as a convenient excuse.

but yeah..i can understand what the'gist' of a song is..
 
Last edited:
vncwilliam said:
now..see that's where either u or the government are starting to sound murky. do u realize what a high priced lawyer can do with that info?

by the way..timbaland just slipped, speechwise, from saying 'i don't know' to..'MAYBE i don't know if it's in the public domain or not.' then he uses time pressure as a convenient excuse.

but yeah..i can understand what the'gist' of a song is..
Click to expand...

Copyright law is murky in terms of what amounts to copying, it does differ as precedents from cases are sometimes at odds with one another. I studied copyright law when I did my law degree and it is an extremely complicated area as some of the boundaries related to copying are not clearly defined.

However the whole public domain issue, Timbaland can never ever argue that at all because of the reason I mentioned before that a work enjoys copyright for the life of the author plus 70 years so there is no way on earth that he sampled can be classed as being in the public domain lol.

To me its clear though that with Nelly Furtado's song Do It he didn't make a material change to the original material at all, they are pretty much identical so its highly likely he will be found liable. If he isn't then he will have one hell of a good lawyer lol.
 
Last edited:
Timbaland is so fake it's sad that this man is now number one in music industry.

Honestly... I think he destroyed pop music.

He is NOT exceptional , NOT talented and DEFINITELY NOT ORIGINAL.

The guy has become a copy of himself - I mean, check out 4 Minutes by Madonna and Elevator by FloRida - it's ridiculous , they are the same.

I am sorry if there are fans here but I just can't understand how someone can claim that "Timbo" has changed pop music and upgraded it...
 
Last edited:
dangerous_88 said:
He is NOT exceptional , NOT talented and DEFINITELY NOT ORIGINAL.
Click to expand...
"Timbo" has changed pop music and upgraded it...
Click to expand...
back in the mid-90s, he was all that.

fat boy virtually invented a pseudo-genre of R&B that was carried through by so many artists (and other producers) into the millennium. in fact, he indirectly influenced the creation of a whole new sub-genre, 2-step UK Garage.

the only difference between him and Teddy Riley is that Riley lost the plot after his artistic prime, while Timbaland took advantage of the changing face of music.

don't get me wrong though, his noughties material is certified bollocks.
 
Last edited:
grrrrrrrrrrrr that man and his irritating success annoys me.
he's everywhere and it ALL SOUNDS THE SAME.


whenever he makes a half decent song, he includes elements of it in the next 5 songs he produces..
EG the chorus melody from Madonna's '4 Minutes' is reused for the chorus in Flo Rida's 'Elevator' and so forth.

EWWWWWWWW
 
Not everyone rips off others' music, but many artists sample, Michael has on many occasions.

I don't agree with some of Timbaland's stuff and his practises.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top