get donkey!

I’ll pass the mic to j. newt for a fist full of lawsuits

Eight years after the fact, obscure, yet acclaimed jazz artist James Newton finds out that 6 seconds of a 1982 recording of his piece “Choir” were sampled on the Beastie Boys’ 1992 track “Pass the Mic”.

What is his reaction?

Is he amused that his little-heard music has caught the attention of someone outside the avant-garde jazz enclave? Is he flattered that some other artist enjoyed his work enough to include a sample of it in one of their songs? Is he thrilled by the possibility that this new exposure might result in someone who is not familiar with his work being inspired to seek him out?

Nope.

Instead he lets his elitist, artsy-fartsy, and priggish musical prejudice shine through and he sues.

NEWTON WASN’T happy. …He says that he’s never received any compensation for the band’s use of the recording and that the Beastie Boys never bothered to ask his permission. Finding out that the song had made it onto a “Beavis & Butt-head” cartoon [Ed. which the band has no control over]only fueled his ire. Newton, a professor at California State University, Los Angeles, says that if he’d been asked, he never would have granted his permission. So in 2000 he sued the Beastie Boys, charging the group with copyright infringement.

But guess what… he lost.

In her ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Nora M. Manella said that Newton’s sequence was basically a “recording,” for which Newton and his publisher had already been compensated, as opposed to a “composition,” and that it was “unoriginal as a matter of law.” (She also denied a motion filed by the Beastie Boys seeking reimbursement from Newton for almost $500,000 in legal fees.)

…

At issue are complicated questions of copyright law, and whether Newton’s permission was needed for the “Choir” sample. Licensing a sample is a two-part process: Permission is needed from both the record label and the composer. The Beastie Boys licensed the sample from Newton’s record label, Munich-based ECM, but neither the company nor the group got permission from Newton. Manella’s ruling in effect said that since the sample was a recording and not a composition, his permission wasn’t needed

I’m not a lawyer, but in my opinion Newton’s label is more at fault here than the B-boys. The Beastie Boys made a good-faith attempt to get permission to use the sample. If he insists on being an stuck-up prick, Newton should go after his label for licensing the use of his work without consulting him.

But see Newton is not really angry about compensation. He is angry that his precious high art was tarnished by the likes of a lowly popular music group.

What’s more, both the Beasties and the label DID try to compensate him…

Newton said that the Beastie Boys offered to compensate him for the use of his material but that the figure was “insulting.” Neither he nor his attorney, Alan Korn, would comment on the amount of the offer. A spokesperson for ECM said that the label tried to contact Newton, but the flutist had moved and the company did not have a current telephone number. The label mailed him a check, for a modest amount, the standard fee for licensing agreements, but it was returned for lack of a forwarding address.

I have no sympathy for this guy at all. A musician has to realize that, at some level, his or her music is a gift to the world. People react to it and use it many different ways. The Beastie Boys, who actually do seem to have some knowledge of music, probably used the sample because they liked it, not because they were trying to cheapen it. Instead of using this opportunity to expand the musical horizons of others that may never have heard of his work, Newton has wasted this opportunity. In my opinion, Newton should be viewed not as an artist attempting to protect his work, but as a small, pompous man that thinks only certain people are fit to hear his music.

August 22nd, 2002 Posted by Rob | Interesting stuff | 2 comments