Dr. Luke and the Art of Stealing Music/Manipulating Your Artists

Dj4Shure said:
You're funny man. It's like you're always against pure hip hop. You're so offensive to sampling but yet look up the people (dj mustard) that just play the same 3 or 4 keys (different synth) throw the same drums, add the famous "HEY" in there, add a shitty rapper, and you got a hit.

Id rather hear kendrick Lamar- Love myself. I mean that sample is so easy that you could've came up with the idea first right?
Click to expand...



I am not against pure hip-hop. DJ Mustard is pure hip-hop. I am not against Kendrick Lamar either. I like his new song. But that beat uses samples. It sounds like that Isley Brothers song "Who's That Lady". That original song is more pure than 99.999999999% of any hip-hop ever created.
 
Desire Inspires said:

I am not against pure hip-hop. DJ Mustard is pure hip-hop.
Click to expand...

SMH at this blasphemy...each post I read is like you pulled your foot out of your mouth just to shoot it!

Fun Fact - if you hear their song on the radio between 7am - 10am...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If they're performing on awards shows sandwiched between Miley Cyrus and Maroon 5...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If dudes are rapping about bling and molly and catchin bodies on every single song of their album and half the rhymes either don't rhyme or rhyme the same word with itself...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If the producer doesn't know what the term "Chord Progression" means...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If the concert (key word is 'concert' and not 'show') is full of popped collared bros and douchebaguettes...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!
 
Last edited:
wildinout8 said:
SMH at this blasphemy...each post I read is like you pulled your foot out of your mouth just to shoot it!

Fun Fact - if you hear their song on the radio between 7am - 10am...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If they're performing on awards shows sandwiched between Miley Cyrus and Maroon 5...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If dudes are rapping about bling and molly and catchin bodies on every single song of their album and half the rhymes either don't rhyme or rhyme the same word with itself...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If the producer doesn't know what the term "Chord Progression" means...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!

If the concert (key word is 'concert' and not 'show') is full of popped collared bros and douchebaguettes...

IT'S RAP!!

NOT HIP HOP!!
Click to expand...



Well then hip hop is wack. Too many rules and too much limitation for me.

Hip hop is too smart for its own good. It doesn't know how to appeal to anybody except a small group of people these days. Rap is the dumber, but cuter and more fun version of hip hop.
 
Desire Inspires said:
Well then hip hop is wack. Too many rules and too much limitation for me.
Click to expand...

Nah son - all the rules are in RAP: talk about bling and money stacks and hoes and how your crew is a bunch of murderers in the club...anything else is too intelligible for the ignorant iTunes consumers.
Desire Inspires said:
Hip hop is too smart for its own good. It doesn't know how to appeal to anybody except a small group of people these days. Rap is the dumber, but cuter and more fun version of hip hop.
Click to expand...

HIP HOP doesn't care to appeal to anybody...remember - there are no rules. HIP HOP is like jazz, classical, bluegrass - a lifestyle not meant for everybody, but those that love it will defend it.

HIP HOP is the Oracle while Rap is the student goofing off and skipping class, then they wonder why they get fired from their part-time job at Walmart's night shift.
 
really that is old news and incorrectly headlined again

there was no judgement entered (read the full article at better publications than the one quoted above), in fact, if anything ,the judge was going to rule against the family

a settlement was reached in which Sony paid a one time figure to make the family go away: they are barred from bringing any similar suits against Sony or its artists as one of the terms of the settlement entered into in the court

use search here for a fuller explanation of the wheretos and whereofs of this now finished sad tale of familial greed vs artistic vision

some hihghlights

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49743123

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49743180

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744483

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744719

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744735


on the broader issue of musical theft

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...ed-marvin-gayes-children-459234/#post49707061
 
bandcoach said:
really that is old news and incorrectly headlined again

there was no judgement entered (read the full article at better publications than the one quoted above), in fact, if anything ,the judge was going to rule against the family

a settlement was reached in which Sony paid a one time figure to make the family go away: they are barred from bringing any similar suits against Sony or its artists as one of the terms of the settlement entered into in the court

use search here for a fuller explanation of the wheretos and whereofs of this now finished sad tale of familial greed vs artistic vision

some hihghlights

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49743123

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49743180

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744483

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744719

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...-over-blurred-lines-song-466568/#post49744735


on the broader issue of musical theft

https://www.futureproducers.com/for...ed-marvin-gayes-children-459234/#post49707061
Click to expand...

I'm not exactly sure what you just showed me besides a bunch of commenters on FP talking about a case, but I'm seeing EVERYWHERE that the case just had a ruling on Halloween...see articles below from ABCNews, MTV, Black Enterprise, LA Times, NY Daily News.

Do you have actual sources (not posters on FP) to claim that this is "old" because everything I'm seeing (and I've been following the case) is from the past few days...where is our disconnect?

Pharrell Williams And Robin Thicke Lose First Round Of 'Blurred Lines' Lawsuit - Black Enterprise

Robin Thicke And Pharrell Williams Lose First Round In 'Blurred Lines' Lawsuit - MTV

Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams lose first round in 'Blurred Lines' case - LA Times

Judge Orders 'Blurred Lines' Song Theft Lawsuit Will Go to Trial - NBC News

Marvin Gaye’s family wins first round against Robin Thicke, Pharrell Williams in ‘Blurred Lines’ lawsuit - NY Daily News
 
hmmm - seems someone forgot to relay the ruling made when the case was dismissed at the start of this year, either that or Sony has pulled it's protection from the two

the following link is where the dismissal was made Marvin Gaye’s Family Wins In “Blurred Lines” Copyright Case | The Source and on the surface reads that all future suits in a similar vein are prohibited as part of the terms of that settlement - this link is quoted in the first thread as part of the first post - it is always interesting to read where a dismissal (a rejecting of the case) is turned into a win because money changed hands

maybe thicke and pharrel were not part of that immunity for further legal action
 
bandcoach said:
hmmm - seems someone forgot to relay the ruling made when the case was dismissed at the start of this year, either that or Sony has pulled it's protection from the two

the following link is where the dismissal was made Marvin Gaye’s Family Wins In “Blurred Lines” Copyright Case | The Source and on the surface reads that all future suits in a similar vein are prohibited as part of the terms of that settlement - this link is quoted in the first thread as part of the first post - it is always interesting to read where a dismissal (a rejecting of the case) is turned into a win because money changed hands

maybe thicke and pharrel were not part of that immunity for further legal action
Click to expand...

I do remember when the original info you posted happened...almost a year ago?

And then I had been hearing recently (why this trial came up again) about how Thicke pretty much threw Pharell under bus saying:
- he was not an actual writer of the song and Pharell did everything
- the only reason he was listed as a writer was to receiver extra publishing money and that it is common practice to do so
- he was in a drug and alcoholic stupor, so details of the creation of the song were fuzzy to him

I had completely forgotten about the case until I came into work yesterday morning and saw the above articles I posted. I really have no idea how a court can give one ruling and then give a different ruling almost a year later (double jeopardy??). But, I am interested in getting more info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top