The Application and Influence of Copyright Law on The Music Industry

Ever since its emergence in 15th and 16th century Europe, copyright law has remained a complicated topic, and it is very difficult to balance the laws so they mutually benefit the artists and the public. The American government has had to face many challenges in order to adapt to new eras, particularly creating numerous laws since 1790 that have increased the duration of one’s copyright term in order for artists to have more control over their works. However, within the realm of music, it is vital for copyright laws to be updated and for new ones to be created in order to stay in touch with the drastically evolving music industry. Many believe that copyright policy makers support the copyright owners in order to encourage creativity, but it is evident that lawmakers have always had more regard towards public interest. The way that copyright law operates nowadays is outdated in the scope of music, and does not reflect the constantly evolving techniques used for production within the music industry.

Modern music technology has been rapidly growing and becoming more accessible to the general public, letting more people be creative and make new, innovative music. However, with the rise of that technology comes new processes and methods of production, some of which are not addressed by current copyright laws, such as sampling. For example, M.C. Hammer’s “U Can’t Touch This” and Vanilla Ice’s “Ice, Ice, Baby” both relied heavily on a particular sample, Rick James’ “Superfreak” and Queen and David Bowie’s “Under Pressure” respectively. Both hits resulted in legal controversy - Hammer settled out of court with James and gave him co-composer credit and a share of royalties, and Ice gave Queen and Bowie songwriting credits (Yglesias). The outcomes of the cases were fair, however, the systematic consequences were much stronger than people had anticipated. Sample clearance became mandated by most major record labels after these two cases, causing many artists who created sample “collages” to not be able to sell their music. For example, the year prior to M.C. Hammer’s settlement, the Beastie Boys had released one of their most famous records, Paul’s Boutique, which featured over 300 samples (Yglesias). If it had been released after Hammer and Ice’s court cases, it would be impossible for their record label to release it without being sued, because they would not have bothered attempting to clear the numerous amount of samples. The legality of sampling is a large area at this point in time, and it is unclear whether copyright policy makers plan on addressing it in a more clear way.

Another important fault in today’s copyright law is how court cases are decided with outdated methods, and how that leads some artists who are clearly copying people’s sound to get away untouched by the law. For example, Caramanica stated about the infamous “Blurred Lines” case, “the jury was instructed to base its decision on the sheet music” (Caramanica). However, with the rise of digital audio workstations, or DAWs, in popular music production, the use of sheet music in music production has strongly decreased. It is incredibly unfair for music to be analyzed with notation and sheet music if it was not created by using any, and copyright law should adapt to newer techniques of production in order to stay in touch with new styles of music. An example of a pair of songs that further prove this point is Iggy Azalea and Charli XCX’s “Fancy” and DJ Mustard’s “Don’t Hurt Me”. Throughout his career, DJ Mustard has used a sharp, bouncy bassline synth that has become his signature sound, and it is the main element of the track “Don’t Hurt Me” (Caramanica). The Invisible Men and the Arcade, the two producers of “Fancy”, clearly copied DJ Mustard’s signature sound, without a doubt, and it is sad that he does not have the legal grounds to take them to court and have an effective case. Not only did they copy the bass synth, but they used an 808-driven beat along with a “Hey!” sample on the off-beats of the verses, both of which are not exclusive to DJ Mustard, but are commonly utilized in his tracks. Finally, the tempo is the same, the drum patterns are very similar, both tracks utilize female rappers, and they both have a catchy vocal hook in the chorus delivered by a featured artist. The only thing that is different between the instrumental of “Fancy” and any given DJ Mustard beat is that the former does not include DJ Mustard’s signature tag, which he places at the beginning of all of his tracks. Because of this, it would be only fair for him to receive co-producing credits along with royalties. However, since copyright law has not adapted to modern music, it has little to offer for an artist such as DJ Mustard, where the signature sound is not in the notes, but in the sound design and the vibe. Appropriate copyright law should be modernized for artists to be able to defend their unique qualities as music producers, especially when it comes to sound design and rhythmic qualities.

Finally, it is important that copyright law is changed so artists who are being infringed upon have more control towards what actions they want to take. Nowadays, it is generally up to the record label of the original artist to decide what they should do about the infringing artist, however, copyright laws should give more of that power towards the original artist. For example, Danger Mouse’s “Grey Album” was a homage to both Jay-Z and the Beatles, who both loved the album and were incredibly impressed by the production. The album was not even meant to be released - Danger Mouse stated, “I just sent out a few tracks and now people are selling it and people are downloading it all over the place… it was not my intent to break copyright laws” (Rimmer). The record was accidentally leaked, and both Jay-Z and the Beatles had no intention of taking Danger Mouse to court. However, the Beatles’ copyright holder, EMI, had other plans - they decided to sue Danger Mouse and order all retailers to cease distribution of the record. Paul McCartney was adamantly against EMI’s decision and said, “I didn’t mind when something like that happened with The Grey Album. But the record company minded. They put up a fuss” (Rimmer). If all of the original artists were against the copyright case, it is ridiculous that copyright law is set up in a way that gives them no power against the decision of the record label, which should be changed. The original artists should have the ability to negotiate with their respective record labels about whether a copyright case should be made, if other actions should be taken, or if the label should just ignore the infringement for some particular reason.

Copyright law is a complicated and intricate topic, but it is clear that it should change in order to be able to protect a musician's signature sound. Nobody is able to write down and notate a signature sound, so songwriters and producers are vulnerable to having their specific styles stolen, such as DJ Mustard. This is not just a recent issue - bands such as Led Zeppelin, The Beach Boys, and Oasis are all known to have stolen from and appropriated black musicians and their specific styles of music. Currently, label owners, the people who make the most money from the release of popular music, are the ones who are strongly protected by copyright law. Nobody can steal from their roster of artists, and if someone does, the label owners make even more money from a court case. Copyright law should be more focused on the protection of artists in order for creativity to flourish, and artists nowadays cannot be pinned down by what notes they use, but by their signature sounds and musical styles. Since the late 18th century in America, and even earlier in other countries, copyright policy makers have worked hard to constantly update the laws in order to keep them relevant to the art of today. It is evident that they should be working hard right now in order to develop new methods of protecting artists who do not rely on sheet music and older techniques of creating music, especially with the rise of electronic music production and the budding bedroom producers all around the world.