By AndrewMack
Thu Sep 09, 2004 1:48 am
Elmacao - Is that for real or were you joking ?
I don't see how they could prove it beyond reasonable doubt in a court - especially if it had had all those effects applied. Very interesting.
Someone once told me that with sampling laws it depends on the length of time of the sample - I was told if it's under 3.2 seconds or something then it's cool - not sure how true that is.
I remember hearing something else about it being related to what percentage of the original composition it is - i.e. if it is under 5% (or something like that) of the original composition then you have not taken a significant percentage of the composition (or maybe it was what percentage of your composition the sample forms ?)
Either way I don't see how just one snare can be ruled as being significant enough.
interesting - is anyone out there a legal expert or something who is up to date with the laws ? I think even in the legal system it's probably a bit of a grey area at the moment too ?
I don't see how they could prove it beyond reasonable doubt in a court - especially if it had had all those effects applied. Very interesting.
Someone once told me that with sampling laws it depends on the length of time of the sample - I was told if it's under 3.2 seconds or something then it's cool - not sure how true that is.
I remember hearing something else about it being related to what percentage of the original composition it is - i.e. if it is under 5% (or something like that) of the original composition then you have not taken a significant percentage of the composition (or maybe it was what percentage of your composition the sample forms ?)
Either way I don't see how just one snare can be ruled as being significant enough.
interesting - is anyone out there a legal expert or something who is up to date with the laws ? I think even in the legal system it's probably a bit of a grey area at the moment too ?




