What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official*** Paul's Boutique and The Copyright and Patent Clause of the Constitution (1 Viewer)

rockaction

Footballguy
All Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 complaints go here.  

I personally think the Beastie Boys's Paul's Boutique is the modern height of collage art, but YMMV.  They've effectively shut off anything like that from ever being done again. It's a shame.  

 
Also, Paul's Boutique was/is redonkulously awesome. 
Listening to Shadrach on 180-gram vinyl right now.  

And Ask For Janice and B-Boy Boullibasse just came on. 

Beastie Boys note: The TV that was smashed in the video for Fight for Your Right to Party was my aunt's. I watched TV on it as a kid. (for reals, true story. my cousin produced the video)
Awesome.  

 
I'm pretty strongly of the opinion that we over-protect IP.  Paul's Boutique is a good argument for why, but also, why the hell is Hemingway not in the public domain?

 
Mind laying out the specifics here for us lay (more like lay-zee) folks? What did they do that did what, now?

 
Now here we go dropping science, dropping it all over
Like bumping around the town like when you're driving a Range Rover
Expanding the horizons and expanding the parameters
Expanding the rhymes of sucka MC amateurs
 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there some actual point to this thread?

What are we supposed to discuss, if anything?
Yeah. I always defend your threads, as abstract and stupid as they are, and this one seems obvious to any con law guy or anyone who takes "intellectual property" seriously.  

It's supposed to be about overreach in terms of copyright and patent law, with an offshoot of the Lanham Act (1848, IIRC) and trademark. It has speech and creative implications, not to mention the useful arts (patent clause). 

Wired and Aaron Schwarz and others called, it wants your intellectual and IP freedom. 

 
Beastie Boys note: The TV that was smashed in the video for Fight for Your Right to Party was my aunt's. I watched TV on it as a kid. (for reals, true story. my cousin produced the video)
Of all the fake news you have posted this is the coolest. 

Just kidding, beasties are all time bad ash. Way ahead of their time. Your cousin probably has some amazing stories. 

 
Fair Use? 

WTF? The entire internet centers around this and other arguments. 

No wonder why you win the tournam:e:nt the past few years. 
How is this about Fair Use? You give no explanation in the OP as to what you are talking about or how this relates to Fair Use. How is anyone not familiar with Paul's Boutique supposed to know what this discussion is supposed to be about?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How is this about Fair Use? You give no explanation in the OP as to what you are talking about or how this relates to Fair Use. How is anyone not familiar with Paul's Boutique supposed to know what this discussion is supposed to be about.
Because the OP said Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 which gives the right to Congress to draft for "the progress of science and the useful arts" under which Sec. 106 and 107 of the U.S. Code can be found. Maybe if you'd give it a minute, it would flesh itself out. 

But this isn't a thread for you. It's a thread for copyright, patent, and in addition, TM law. It's a good thread. Roll with it.  

 
Because the OP said Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 which gives the right to Congress to draft for "the progress of science and the useful arts" under which Sec. 106 and 107 of the U.S. Code can be found. Maybe if you'd give it a minute, it would flesh itself out. 

But this isn't a thread for you. It's a thread for copyright, patent, and in addition, TM law. It's a good thread. Roll with it.  
And how does Paul's Boutique fit into this discussion? That has yet to be explained. It is not self evident from anything posted so far. And why are we vaguely discussing intellectual property laws in this sub forum?

 
And how does Paul's Boutique fit into this discussion? That has yet to be explained. It is not self evident from anything posted so far. And why are we vaguely discussing intellectual property laws in this sub forum?
What are you grilling me for? It's the ####### patent and copyright clause of the Constitution. Of course it goes here, #######. 

If you don't know what Paul's Boutique and the Beasties meant to copyright law, look it up. Get off of my heels, yipping dog.  

 
I'm pretty strongly of the opinion that we over-protect IP.  Paul's Boutique is a good argument for why, but also, why the hell is Hemingway not in the public domain?
Sonny Bono's Copyright Term Extension Act. Almost overturned by the Supreme Court. 

Justice Breyer argued for a public domain and public funding of the arts of all works in a 1970 law review article. (Not that I support that.) He almost sided with the plaintiffs in the case against the CTEA.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You can blame Mickey Mouse. Hopefully Congress realizes that continually extending copyright is just a BS moneygrab so that stuff can finally start rolling into the public domain.
The lobbying of Congress by Hollywood and others worked. They got their life plus seventy.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
Right. But Steamboat Willie should enter the public domain January 1, 2024 (95 year from 1928) unless they extend it again. I'm not sure 95 years should really be considered a "limited time", but I don't have the lobbying money of the big guys. 

 
Right. But Steamboat Willie should enter the public domain January 1, 2024 (95 year from 1928) unless they extend it again. I'm not sure 95 years should really be considered a "limited time", but I don't have the lobbying money of the big guys. 
Yep. That's why this could be a great thread. To discuss the influence of money on the textual limitations the Constitution places upon copyrights and patents. It also can be a conduit into discussing pharmaceuticals. In short, a good place to drop beefs about C, P, or Tm.  

 
Mind laying out the specifics here for us lay (more like lay-zee) folks? What did they do that did what, now?
Ah, where to begin? Sampling and break beats and all that stuff. I'm also a layman. Watching the movie Scratch would clarify it. So would talking with urbanhack.  

I think that Paul's Boutique, and the Beasties in general, are considered at the avant-garde of legal sampling. Sampling involves taking a sound recording of another and using it in your own songs. Generally, it's done in snippets, like a break beat (a drum loop) or a bass line.

Here is copyright law, 17 U.S. Code Section 106:

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

Why the Beasties? The Beasties sort of brought this method, often used in New York, to the fore in the late eighties and wound up in court a lot because of it. They not only got sued, but they clarified a lot of judicial thinking about copyright law. For example, not many people know that both the actual sound recording and underlying composition of a musical act is protected by copyright law. I forget what case it is, but they got sued for both the sound recording and underlying composition. Their suits can be found here, ranging a decade in time: 

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/65708/beastie-boys-emerge-victorious-in-sampling-suit

and here: 

https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6509648/beastie-boys-lawsuit-pauls-boutique-sampling

 
All Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 complaints go here.  

I personally think the Beastie Boys's Paul's Boutique is the modern height of collage art, but YMMV.  They've effectively shut off anything like that from ever being done again. It's a shame.  
Never thought of that before. 

 
Ah, where to begin? Sampling and break beats and all that stuff. I'm also a layman. Watching the movie Scratch would clarify it. So would talking with urbanhack.  

I think that Paul's Boutique, and the Beasties in general, are considered at the avant-garde of legal sampling. Sampling involves taking a sound recording of another and using it in your own songs. Generally, it's done in snippets, like a break beat (a drum loop) or a bass line.

Here is copyright law, 17 U.S. Code Section 106:

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

Why the Beasties? The Beasties sort of brought this method, often used in New York, to the fore in the late eighties and wound up in court a lot because of it. They not only got sued, but they clarified a lot of judicial thinking about copyright law. For example, not many people know that both the actual sound recording and underlying composition of a musical act is protected by copyright law. I forget what case it is, but they got sued for both the sound recording and underlying composition. Their suits can be found here, ranging a decade in time: 

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/65708/beastie-boys-emerge-victorious-in-sampling-suit

and here: 

https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6509648/beastie-boys-lawsuit-pauls-boutique-sampling
I asked essentially the same question Koya did, but while I was condescendingly told to "look it up" you actually explained the basics here, which was all that I was after. So it wasn't the asked that was asked, was it? It was who posed the question.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I asked essentially the same question Koya did, but while I was condescendingly told to "look it up" you actually explained the basics here, which was all that I was after. So it wasn't the question asked that was asked, was it? It was who posed the question.
It was both of you combined upon further reading and wanting a serious discussion of the thread. I have tons of respect for you, squis. I was just surprised you went after the actual thread instead of giving it time considering I always chime in for you. That's probably the problem here.

We can take any personal problems to the Russia thread.   :lol:

eta* And I mean that. After further reflection, I realized I might be on my own trip, but other people got it, and got the Paul's reference, but it needs to be put in bold print.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Never thought of that before. 
The Biz Markie case out of the SDNY circuit and subsequent refusal of cert at all levels in '01-'02 that I cited above sort of sealed clearances/sampling as we know it. The only reason Dre was able to get Clinton back in '04-'05 is because Clinton was either too stoned to know (or had signed away his rights to Bridgeport Music as I recall.) 

I wonder if I can't dig up a video from EFF or something similar to explain it to us n00bs. 

 
I asked essentially the same question Koya did, but while I was condescendingly told to "look it up" you actually explained the basics here, which was all that I was after. So it wasn't the asked that was asked, was it? It was who posed the question.
It's as if nobody likes you.

 
Because the OP said Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 which gives the right to Congress to draft for "the progress of science and the useful arts" under which Sec. 106 and 107 of the U.S. Code can be found. Maybe if you'd give it a minute, it would flesh itself out. 

But this isn't a thread for you. It's a thread for copyright, patent, and in addition, TM law. It's a good thread. Roll with it.  
Technically, Congress enacted TM law under the Commerce Clause, not the copyright/patent clause. :nerd:  

 
1) Paul's Boutique is an excellent album, and sampling should be opened up more than it is now.

2) The  patent system is far more broken than the copyright system, even if the latter overprotects both scope and duration of copyright.

 
Technically, Congress enacted TM law under the Commerce Clause, not the copyright/patent clause. :nerd:  
Yup. See OP or a little later  Lanham Act of 1848, I believe.  

You're not being a nerd, friend  :D . Always good to have accuracy.  

TM law is totally statutory in nature, that's why it was left out of title of the thread. In fact, attempts at incorporating it into Art !, 8, 8 were struck down by the S. Ct., if I'm not mistaken. 

Double  :nerd:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey the Stray Cats' Sexy & 17 was shot at my grammar school. I'd like to think that's worth something, damnit.
A like on a message board for being the second coolest thing in the thread?!

You got fight...for your right...

This could be a cool thread. Ch-ch-ch-check it out.  I'm serious, though, while being light-hearted. There are some people doing excellent work on copyright and patent law, and it affects us all in ways we don't know.  

 
All Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 complaints go here.  

I personally think the Beastie Boys's Paul's Boutique is the modern height of collage art, but YMMV.  They've effectively shut off anything like that from ever being done again. It's a shame.  


To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
1789, isn't that just beautiful.

I've always had a question about fair use. I'm kind of a believer in the communality of thoughts and art, but inventors seem like something different. Invent something and you should reap the benefits. But imagine if the written word, crafted sound or the drawn image could be seized for misappropriation, it would be the end of a good deal of journalism, art and new music as we know it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1789, isn't that just beautiful.

I've always had a question about fair use. I'm kind of a believer in the communality of thoughts and art, but inventors seem like something different. Invent something and you should reap the benefits. But imagine if the written word or the drawn image could be seized for misappropriation, it would be the end of a good deal of journalism as we know it. 
My friend, that's the Selden and the AP cases. You can't copyright a fact. That's how the S. Ct. ruled. In order for a journalistic piece to get copyright, it has to be bout the flowery language around it, never the facts.  Ask and ye shall receive in this thread. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Selden

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_News_Service_v._Associated_Press

 
A like on a message board for being the second coolest thing in the thread?!

You got fight...for your right...

This could be a cool thread. Ch-ch-ch-check it out.  I'm serious, though, while being light-hearted. There are some people doing excellent work on copyright and patent law, and it affects us all in ways we don't know.  
I think what was done to George Harrison was awful. 

But I am also totally in favor of the Gaye family winning against Thicke.

The only reasoning I can think of on my part is that I love Dark Horse, believe Marvin is a genius of humanity, and hate both Alan and Robin Thicke.

 
I’m afraid I don’t understand the link. Has there been a recent case?  Because the IP Clause (and the relevant portion of the Copyright Act) haven’t changed since Paul’s Boutique came out. 

 
Of all the fake news you have posted this is the coolest. 

Just kidding, beasties are all time bad ash. Way ahead of their time. Your cousin probably has some amazing stories. 
Surprisingly, we almost never talked about it. Maybe because as it was happening I was too young (about 10-12 years younger, he's probably same age as the beasties)... then when ainreally got into them, which was because of Paul's Boutique I was off to college on the west coast. 

We did discuss it a little after the (Vanity Fair?) article about them, in which my cuz was interviewed.  It's all the more crazy because my cousin doesn't really drink or do drugs - in fact, I'm not sure he ever really did. He was kind of one of those guys that could be clean of all that #### but still crazy and not come off like some "straight edge" wannabe, it was just him (may or may not have to do with his sister / my cousin also obviously, having died in a drunk driving crash right before all this happened, in like '85 or so).

hes a great guy though - now running his dads and my step dads company (a heater and baseboard manufacturer - he'd rather just be making movies IMO).

Oh, beyond just the TV I think (not sure) it was filmed primarily at my aunt and uncles house in Great Neck, NY.

While I've never used his pull to meet them, if ever I did he would certainly come up. I DID get to see the Beasties play No Sleep Til at Mcarren Poop before it reopened, which I think was the first / only time they had played brooklyn since they made it big and that was pretty ####### cool.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m afraid I don’t understand the link. Has there been a recent case?  Because the IP Clause (and the relevant portion of the Copyright Act) haven’t changed since Paul’s Boutique came out. 
Hey Scoob (Ramsay)!

Yeah, the clause hasn't changed but the interpretation of what sound recordings are protected has under Art. 1, Sec. 8, Clause 8 has. In 1992, SDNY set the standard with the Biz Markie ruling. Boutique came out in '89. The Supremes refused cert on the issue from the Biz ruling. Now any sound recording that is sampled needs clearance (through IP licensing and $$$$). Back before '92, sampling was considered under the fair use doctrine of Sec. 107 of the U.S. Code. 

I get what you're saying. I figured it was a fun way to start the thread. YMMV.  

Our music all sounds different because of it.  

 
Surprisingly, we almost never talked about it. Maybe because as it was happening I was too young (about 10-12 years younger, he's probably same age as the beasties)... then when ainreally got into them, which was because of Paul's Boutique I was off to college on the west coast. 

We did discuss it a little after the (Vanity Fair?) article about them, in which my cuz was interviewed.  It's all the more crazy because my cousin doesn't really drink or do drugs - in fact, I'm not sure he ever really did. He was kind of one of those guys that could be clean of all that #### but still crazy and not come off like some "straight edge" wannabe, it was just him (may or may not have to do with his sister / my cousin also obviously, having died in a drunk driving crash right before all this happened, in like '85 or so).

hes a great guy though - now running his dads and my step dads company (a heater and baseboard manufacturer - he'd rather just be making movies IMO).

Oh, beyond just the TV I think (not sure) it was filmed primarily at my aunt and uncles house in Great Neck, NY.

While I've never used his pull to meet them, if ever I did he would certainly come up. I DID get to see the Beasties play No Sleep Til at Mcarren Poop before it reopened, which I think was the first / only time they had played brooklyn since they made it big and that was pretty ####### cool.
You were right in the other thread that I never got to respond to. We do have a sort of intellectual kinship. 

Hardcore and rap made up the early part of my youth, and No Sleep Til was my favorite song as a teenager. I got people back into the Beastie Boys as a kid after they left their frat ways. 

But again, enough personal on my end. Glad to have everybody chime in. Figured I'd make this a place for fun venting about IP law.  

 
Not exactly sure why, maybe it's just my intellectual curiosity, but I really appreciate this thread rockaction. Thank you. I will be checking in often.
That's music to this intellectual property nerd's ears. Great to hear. I hope it'll be a measured thread about intellectual property. It's a cool subject to study and be involved with. Its scope is large when it comes to the most entertained people on earth (us). 

 
You were right in the other thread that I never got to respond to. We do have a sort of intellectual kinship. 

Hardcore and rap made up the early part of my youth, and No Sleep Til was my favorite song as a teenager. I got people back into the Beastie Boys as a kid after they left their frat ways. 

But again, enough personal on my end. Glad to have everybody chime in. Figured I'd make this a place for fun venting about IP law.  
As long as we can lace in some dope beats along the way, all good with me. 

Like Motamouth said on F.H.H. With rjd2...

Just 'cause lazy #####s use recognisable material

Don't mean the dope samples are not original

'Cause a producer with skill can lace tracks

Keyboard beats aren't that original, lets face facts

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top