Re: utah saints

[pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)]

In <1992Sep9.165103.2284@athena.mit.edu> mailrus!gatech!tlon.mit.edu!rob@uunet.uu.net (Rob Sanner) writes:
>their song, which is getting a distressing amount of airplay up here
>is called, i think, "something good", and is built almost entirely
>around a sample from cloudbusting.
>while catchy, it really burns me that something like this can qualify
>as somehow a "new" composition.  actually, what is the copyright law on
>this; does KaTe have to give permission for the sample?? if not, the piece
>becomes even more execrable IMHO.

I have the disc.  They credit her, and it *appears* that they had permission.

I think if you were to bother to listen to the MUSIC behind the SAMPLE
you might have noticed a significant difference between it and "Cloudbusting".
Certainly the sample is key to the whole piece, but your opinions about
"new" composition are ridiculous.  You might as well start slamming anyone
who uses a melody that has been used before--I suppose Kate's use of
Handsome Cabin Boy is just completely BOGUS by those standards, right?


I can understand not liking it, but I can't understand trying to slam it
on such silly grounds.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
        People say that I'm out of touch with reality.  That I'm insane.
    Sometimes I forget things.  Who I am.  Where I am.  Unimportant things.
                       But I'm not insane.  I am a tick.