Lawyer Reacts To Rick Beato - Isn't This Just Stealing?

In this episode of the Top Music Attorney Podcast, Entertainment Attorney, Miss Krystle reacts to Rick Beato's video "isn't this just stealing" discussing interpolations in music. Miss Krystle delves into the concept of interpolation, explaining how it differs from sampling and covers, and why it's a critical issue in copyright law. She provides insights into how some artists manage to use identical melodies without crediting the original songwriters, raising important questions about rights and permissions in the music industry.
As a seasoned lawyer with 10 years of experience, Miss Krystle breaks down the legal nuances of interpolation, using Beato's examples of Miley Cyrus's "Prisoner" and Dua Lipa's "Break My Heart" to illustrate her points. She also shares her own experience in court, arguing that even when melodies are re-recorded, artists still need to obtain licenses. Miss Krystle emphasizes the importance of understanding copyright laws in this reaction video.
Legal Disclaimer: The information, ideas, and suggestions in this video are not intended to be legal advice. Before following any suggestions contained in this video, you should consult your personal attorney. The speaker shall not be liable or responsible for any loss or damage allegedly arising as a consequence of your use or application of any information or suggestion in this video. Pursuant to the fair use doctrine under the 1978 Copyright Act, a copyrighted work owned by another may be used for criticism, commentary, news reporting, and educational purposes. The use of the livestream contained in this video falls within the fair use doctrine.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Beato's Channel: / @rickbeato
🟡Become Your Own Record Label:
www.topmusicat...
💻 #1 Resource For Artists And Producers: www.topmusicat...
⚖ Hire An Attorney: www.delgadoent...
📺 Get Your Music Into Tv/Film/Games: www.topmusicat...
📰 Get My Newsletter: www.topmusicat...
📄 8 Essential Music Contracts Bundle: www.topmusicat...
🎧 Listen To The TMA Podcast On All Streaming: www.topmusicat...
🟢 Free Stuff: www.topmusicat...
Miss Krystle Artist Links: www.misskrystl...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP MUSIC ATTORNEY SOCIALS
Links: www.topmusicat...
Website: topmusicattorn...
Instagram: / topmusicattorney
Tik Tok: www.tiktok.com...
Facebook: / topmusicattorney
Linkedin: / top-music-attorney-164...
MISS KRYSTLE SOCIALS
Website: www.misskrystle...
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
Instagram: / misskrystlelive
Tik Tok: / misskrystlelive
Facebook: / misskrystlelive
Linkedin: / misskrystle
Twitter: / misskrystlelive
Website: www.misskrystle...
VIDEO SHOT AND EDITED BY:
Dukes Up Records
THEME / SHOW MUSIC BY:
That Orko
#RickBeatoReaction #Interpolation #MusicBusinessPodcast

[@TopMusicAttorney]

What should I react to next? Original Rick Beato Video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oJCcfZSorJKbgK8 🟡 Become your Own Record Label: www.topmusicattorney.com/becomeyourownrecordlabel 🟢 Free Split Sheet Template: www.topmusicattorney.com/splitsheet 📄 Music Contracts Templates: www.topmusicattorney.com/music-contracts 📺 Get Your Music Into Tv/Film/Games: www.topmusicattorney.com/sync 💻 #1 Resource For Artists And Producers: www.topmusicattorney.com ⚖ Hire An Attorney: www.delgadoentertainmentlaw.com 📰 Get My Newsletter: www.topmusicattorney.com/newsletter/ 🎧 Listen To The TMA Podcast On All Streaming: www.topmusicattorney.com/podcast 🟢 Free Stuff: www.topmusicattorney.com/free-stuff

[@karlderdelinckx]

Maybe an idea… I use an app called pixlr to manipulate images from musiscians I make. But last I stopped doing so because of the updated terms of service. Would be very informative if you could analyse some of those terms of service to.

[@tcttvradio]

@@TopMusicAttorney covers aren’t allowed legally without a licence, try doing a cover of hotel California on KZbin. What happened was that KZbin was swamped with covers for the last 15 years and it’s not now until the scraping software can now go copyright strike all the covers that bands like the eagles, AC/DC or Pink Floyd can go hard strike.

[@WineSippingCowboy]

Can Con and Bryan Adams. 1991 to today. Canada 🇨🇦 went even worse than Can Con. Adams is evem more mad. 😡

[@JJvienneau]

Wings of Pegasus' has a great one about fake American Idol contestants posting videos and registering the original songs as their own and getting monetized!!

[@cobeeble]

Take a look at "Wings of Pegasus" here on YT. Fil definitely hooked into a lunker exposing some clown in India who is making videos of songs but using the original vocal tracks instead of making derivative work. It's crazy.

[@bjowen5335]

The point being: interpolation is ok AS LONG AS permission is given by the original writer(s). If no permission is given, it's simply theft.

[@joel2421]

@@bjowen5335 You do not need the permission of the original writer. You need to credit them & compensate them. That’s it.

[@MajorCatas]

To compensate them you need to form a mutual agreement with them as to the value\terms of the compensation. Until that agreement is reached you are not allowed to use their work. i.e. you do not have permission.

[@joel2421]

@@MajorCatas You don’t understand the law. And Rick is wrong anyway. In all of these examples the music was used legally.

[@AD-kv9kj]

@@joel2421 How can you possibly know that? You're either just guessing because you want that to be so or you work in the industry and are here trying to manipulate public opinion on social media...which is extremely common now to the point of it being utterly creepy and dangerous to society.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

@@AD-kv9kj Copyright includes a COMPULSORY LICENSE for cover versions and deivative works. If you publish a song and establish the right to collect royalties, everyone gets to steal it. They just have to pay. When you read new stories about artists stopping, say, politicians from playing their songs, that power flows from control of the license to the RECORDING. Barry white's estate can sue Donald Trump for playing Barry's recorded song at a rally - but if Trump whips out his accordion and records a cover version, the White estate can't lift a finger to stop him. Everybody steals - copyright just imposes order on the process of theft.

[@ndifference]

What I find most perplexing is that it takes eight people to "write" those songs.

[@SteveHindman]

They need so many people so that they can suck ideas from a wider variety of other music to finally come up with something.

[@machinate]

this actually pertains to an improvement over , say, the 80s. youd be stunned to see how many ppl had creative input on steely dan, quincy jones etc records, but were never credited.

[@saucyjk6453]

yeah, its pathetic. a guy i was in a band with in the 90s wrote a grammy winning country song for a huge artist, but im pretty sure he has 3 or co writers on it. dudes a very good writer, but......nashville is a certain place. like L.A. but the old guard are different. L>A> is mostly jewish as far as history and rcord labels and publishing.....nashville is im guessing WASPy southern gentry. both use nepotism.

[@baronvonlichtenstein]

That's the modern tin pan alley. Often coming from Sweden now. Pop divas routinely have 10 producers and 15 songwriters on an album. No longer Pete Townshend, McCartney and Lennon or Jagger and Richards. They are workshops. But this existed in the 60s and much earlier. But even THEN it was often a composer and lyricist. The past 20 years there are teams of writer producers.

[@ashscott6068]

@@machinate Hell, Michael Jackson basically pretended to be a musician his whole career

[@Starriddin]

Rick is right. Interpolation is a term made by lawyers to keep their greedy clients from giving song credits to the real artists and for buying a license to use someone else’s original ideas. The Beatles and Zeppelin were both sued for copyright infringement for far less similarity. Thankfully they both prevailed.

[@ricomajestic]

Led Zep literally ripped off the complete songs from various blues artists! There was no interpolation in that case!

[@RobBCactive]

@@Starriddin the problem with copyright is it all comes down to legal enforcement, in a court there's no guarantee against home town decisions.

[@Starriddin]

@@ricomajestic I agree with you on some of the old Delta Blues stuff, but, the Stairway to Heaven case was BS in my opinion.

[@aquamarine99911]

@@Starriddin Eh, it was pretty damn close. And the fact that the bands had toured together during that era. Jimmy didn't just pick up that arpeggio out of the ether.

[@John-k6f9k]

@@ricomajestic And folk songs. Black Mountain Side is virtually identical to a Bert Jansch song, and Bron y Aur Stomp steals from the Waggoners Lad by Jansch too.

[@robutubemacarthur]

the ones doing this will be the first to sue when it happens to them .

[@AmirMahine]

It's too bad that "new" songwriters aren't required to STATE THEIR CREDENTIALS. Much like video clip hijackers- VIEWERS are not aware of the NAMES (that often change for new confusion and profits ) (and don't know HOW to "check for validity OF" the "new songwriter/singer or recording tech?) Wings of Pegasus is contending the same ; his attorney ( Scott Lesowitz, Beverly Hills) is trying to advise PHIL on this also, but it doesn't help that the internet trolls are ignoring the whole theft. Suppose my comment will be deleted for TRUTH and VALID INFORMATION.

[@TribalGuitars]

What's going to be funny is when they get all pissed off and want to sue because they convinced themselves it was their song and someone gets the pleasure of informing them otherwise.

[@r0xjo0]

They are all industry puppets, so...

[@rolandkarlsson7072]

@robotubemacarthur - that is not likely. Your comment lack all contact with reality.

[@bobbynip66]

Top Music Attorney is ‘Interpolating’ Rick Beato’s video. Take an already interesting video and ‘react’ to it. 😂

[@daviddavies3637]

Interpolation is a borrowed word. Mathematicians demand that music lawyers pay a license fee.

[@HalfassDIY]

Lawyers didn't make up Interpolation, they stole (interpolated) it from the mathematicians.

[@markdeffebach8112]

curve fitting

[@NoDaysOff-oz2zl]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@ericmills9839]

LOL, but it doesn't make sense from a math perspective to me! Interpolation is filling in the blanks between points using various forms of estimation models, straight line being the most basic. I can't get my head around how that applies to songwriting, there is no filling in of blanks, it's lifting it. Maybe it's because they are using the melody of a good song to fill in the blank spaces of a new crappy one?

[@stephenspackman5573]

One speaks of one text being interpolated into another during the editing process. There's a lot of interpolation discussed in bible studies. Biologists talk about interpolations into genes. The word gets used in discussing film and drama. It's a perfectly normal word that's been used by everyone since always (I'm not sure quite how old it is, but it is borrowed from Latin where it already had the same meaning among others), and I've got no idea how Rick and Miss Krystle don't seem to know it.

[@davidboreham]

@ericmills9839 it's interpolation in a high order space, not linear interpolation.

[@carlosanvito]

Now I get it. A guy holds up the bank and extracts $100,000 from the teller at gunpoint. He converts the money into a new S Class Benz. When he's apprehended and brought before the Court, his bullet-proof defence is that didn't steal anything, but merely "interpolated" the bank's property. Gotta love it.

[@RealHomeRecording]

How did the bank get the money to begin with?

[@darcyperkins7041]

@@RealHomeRecording People put it there.

[@dougoneill7266]

No, that would be appropriation, and all art is appropriation, apparently.

[@johnnykeys1978]

Hasn't the "you wouldn't steal a car" thing already been done before? - and wasn't it mocked? because in film piracy the original item is duplicated not 'stolen' thus degrading the intended message of: 'do not take credit (or get paid) for other peoples work'

[@RealHomeRecording]

@@johnnykeys1978 too many people like to argue that intellectual property isn't a thing but...there is value in ideas. The founding fathers of the USA were smart enough to realize this and enshrined it in the supreme law of the land but...it's up to the idea executor to defend that IP.

[@jmagda41]

I'm old now, but when I was 14, 15, 16, sitting around in my bedroom or playing with my buddies trying to write songs (because we were going to be the next...whoever) anytime I or we would come up with something, one of us would say, "Nah, that sounds too much like this song or that section just sped up or slowed down." As kids, we didn't want to copy or rip off another song. Not because of any legalities, but because we wanted our own creation, something no one could say, "Oh that's just so and so's song; you just copied it." Teenagers, and we had morals! Imagine that. Not today, though, from grown a$$ adults!

[@Bacopa68]

I grew up with a lot of classical music. I could copy a bass line from Bach and rest of my HS band thought I was a genius with totally jammable bass lines.

[@ClockworkWyrm]

Personally I don't thin k melodies or beats should be copyrightable, entire songs sure, lyrics obviously, but not just clips and certain beat tracks. That's like trying to claim copyright over basic sentences because they were included in a book.

[@cgall4444]

We all know most lawyers are SLIMY

[@ChrisB-x1i]

Sometimes it happens unintentionally though. We have plenty of artists even in the 60s and 70s doing this. It's not something that only happens today. lmao

[@HatchetMouth]

Same & for the 16 years of working this ethical & sound way to create, this is everything I despise.

[@Dutch2go]

“Interpolation” is a misleading euphemism for “copying” - period.

[@ej2796]

No. It has its own definition wich is different than the definition of the word "copying". But depending on the way it's often used, it's can commonly be interpreted as being basically the same thing as "copying".

[@lee4547]

Interpolation is like merging two things together. So technically it's not an exact copy, but as Rick said, it's a copy and I agree.

[@tbarnum6315]

maybe the saying needs to be changed from lies, damn lies and statistics to Lies, Law and Statistics

[@tim6723-f4i]

No. It is not misleading or a euphemism - interpolation has a legal definition which Miss Krystle explained in her video. Rick Beato was wrong when he said it was a made up word used to get around copyright. Period.

[@AMPProf]

nooobs noooo

[@scottbb]

I'm surprised your federal case agument didn't refer to George Harrison's "My Sweet Lord" being found liable for essentially copying ("interpolating") The Chiffon's "He's So Fine". Or how John Fogerty was sued for sounding like himself (he didn't own rights to his CCR song "Run Through the Jungle", and was sued for his 1985 song "Old Man Down the Road" for being too sound-alike). Fogerty prevailed eventually, but both cases show how precarious "interpolation" is, legally speaking.

[@jordanmatchett8341]

to be fair CCR was Fogherty.

[@dannylgriffin]

@@jordanmatchett8341 the point is, he didn't own his own publishing rights. Rookie move. Frank Zappa told everyone, own your own publishing rights! This was back in the 1960's or early 70's. Record companies are often snakes. Isn't Mylie Cyrus or Taylor Swift going through this right now?

[@thomasa.243]

@@dannylgriffinTaylor Swift, yeah. She modifies here own songs slightly and re-records them.

[@raygunsforronnie847]

@@thomasa.243What Swift does not own are the Master Recording rights. Scooter still owns those rights to her first 3 (IIRC) albums so she only benefits from the songwriting royalties; she makes nothing from her recorded performance on those records. That's why she went back into the studio to re-record the songs - to have records she owns all the rights to.

[@1978garfield]

The case of My Sweet Lord still pisses me off. If you listen to 50's pop there are 1000 songs with the same melody and the chords C Am F and G . Me and my dad used to make a game of it, We would start playing the chords and he would sing as many songs as he could remember the words to. This could go on for a long time. Poor Little Fool, Dream Lover, (OK in Dream Lover you change the rhythm a tiny bit in the chorus. You Are My Special Angel, (If you are feeling froggy play the induvial notes of those cords one at a time to match the piano part on the record) and there were many others. Nobody went to court over those. Then there are cases where Steve Miller had to give up 1/4 of the publishing to The Joker because he said "lovey dovey all the time". Apparently some other songwriter owns those words. I may owe him money. Don't even get me started on Don Henley. I guess the TL;DR of this is there is no consistency when it comes to copyright law enforcement.

[@Back2SquareOne]

Ugh. This video added very little info. Is "interpolation" in the written law? Has it been recognized by the court? What is the case history for people who have "interpolated" melodies into their own derivative work, without license or attribution? Is this unsettled law? It sure would be nice to know.

[@DamnedEyez]

I thought she mentioned early on that you'd still need a license. The lack of songwriting credit may be due to some agreement behind the scenes, but it'd still require a license.

[@thatguy6054]

She said she had to explain "interpolation" to the court, which suggests that the word is not written into any law. She was building her case around the written law and explaining the popular term and how it relates to the law.

[@fsteddy6576]

You got some good responses but I also felt your frustration. I think its due to the ambiguity of the North American courts. I'm curious as to where the line is drawn that makes a song similar to another but not a copy. There are only 7 notes, and since most songs follow a 251 format or 12 bar blues AND there's as many songs composed in a day as there are eggs laid, you'd expect some overlap.

[@JohnnyNoPockets]

@@fsteddy6576 Slight correction; there are 12 notes, not counting "micro-tones" ; )

[@SteveHindman]

George Harrison lost a lawsuit where he was accused of "interpolating" the song "He's so Fine" into his song "My Sweet Lord."

[@brocktechnology]

There was a few sidebars but you didn't actually answer any of the questions. You implied that rick has discovered a bunch of instances where artists have not yet discovered they need to sue somebody, but you didn't commit to the opinion.

[@kingo_friver]

Rick: "Slimy lawyers do this" Reaction as a lawyer: "Yes"

[@phillippitts6294]

I wouldn’t let this lady be my lawyer. Kinda of a doofus

[@TheChzoronzon]

​@@phillippitts6294 Au contraire, she demonstrated right in front of our eyes she's a pretty good lawyer You are mistaking "good layer" with "moral person", go figure Bru...

[@TheChzoronzon]

@@kingo_friver Rick: "Slimy lawyers do this" Reaction as a lawyer: "Maybe. With some caveats"

[@binsarm9026]

@@musicafteroldage i don't know that reference but she is basically piggy-backing on Beato's video. i clicked the video seriously expecting a lawyer's reaction and further clarification but all we get is "Rick message me" - wtf. and now YT al go ri thm will offer me more of this crap . DAMN

[@ruthlessreid9172]

Note to self: never hire attorneys with Kool aid hair.

[@musicwith2]

Shes argued and won in front of the fifth and 11th circuit superior courts. Id say shes qualified, hair color or not.

[@fatfredthe28th]

While you may think the premise is bullshit (I surely do), she's seemingly very good at her job. If i need good legal counsel, I don't care if they look like Grimace, I just need them to be competent.

[@ruthlessreid9172]

@@fatfredthe28th thanks fine for accounting and medicine but a lawyer has to convince 12 superficial people appearance is 6/10 of that easily.

[@fatfredthe28th]

@@ruthlessreid9172 , appearance is 6/10 of what makes a "superficial" juror think a lawyer is good or otherwise? Am I understanding your take correctly?

[@cjay2]

Never hire anyone with Kool-Aid hair.

[@ScromptySplooshy]

'Interpolation' is bullshit

[@cardigansrule]

By the way you stole this video from Rick Beato.

[@canebuilder3520]

What is the name of those little fish that latch on to sharks? Just wonderin’

[@manlioyllades]

She "interpolated" it 😂

[@kellypidgeon4269]

She did it with his permission.

[@geraldmartin7703]

Remora.

[@jasonfritz838]

@@canebuilder3520 Douchebag, which is you.

[@davemiller6055]

If Dua Lipa was doing this with written works like a book, she'd be sued for plagiarism and lose.

[@ScubaSteveCanada]

Not if the book had footnotes declaring where the statements came from. In music, that would be adding the original writers.

[@davemiller6055]

@@ScubaSteveCanada Which she hasn't done on some of her songs.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

She's the man now, dog!

[@brafman1]

@scubastevecanada This is not quite right. Admitting who you copied something from does not make the copying ok. This misunderstanding seems widespread -- many people seem to think its ok to copy someone else as long as you credit this. Apart from a few particular exceptions, you cannot copy copyrighted things, like music and books, without getting permission from the original copyright owner to do the copying.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

@@brafman1 Ethically, it's a more complicated question than that. There is no "natural" standard of ownership - once you've heard a seven-note riff, it lives in your head, it's just as much YOURS as it was the other guy's. Which is why copyright law is 100% based on the scope of the statutory regime. One reason that the copyright is time-limited is to reflect the fact that, at a certain point, so many people have the music in their heads that it's silly to try and trace it back to a single point of origin. Legally, the statue imposed a compulsory license for covers and derivative works. So, yes, copying the music is OK. The issue is that the statutes were written precisely to make the footnotes important, because you wanted to encourage people with clever musical ideas to write them down. I'm not sure that makes copying without attribution "wrong" - it's more accurate to say it creates a cause of action fo the owner of the copyright. So if you attribute the rights holder,, or make a side deal to compensate the rights holder for waiving enforcement of the copyright, you're squarely within the bounds of the law. Despite what ASCAP will tell you, everything about copyright law has to do with business, not the moral duty the public owes the artist. Everybody steals - copyrights just allow the theft to proceed in an orderly fashion, so gangsters can't muscle musicians out.

[@TribalGuitars]

What's confusing, especially with the time limitations, is that Robin Thicke gets the snot sued out of him for a song that was inspired by Marvin Gaye but wasn't remotely close to being lifted, but these "artists" have straight out ripped them off with no credit in many cases, and nothing happens.

[@johnnykeys1978]

well that is because at the very top of the industry the performers are just puppets doing what they are told, and cases like the one you have just mentioned are either: a) some producers / executives using the courtroom as a battlefield to settle some other non-related issue, or b) the artist has failed their obligations to the label. Since the label has invested so much into making the (often, but not always mediocre) artist 'musically palatable' in the recording studio, and bought up so much radio (and equivalent) airtime, they expect the artist to behave a certain way. Cases like this are a result of breaching this 'contract', or as a 'flex' used to send a message to other artists. In some cases the punishment is more extreme - a few notable examples being artists aged 27.

[@bombercountyblues]

It's much less confusing once you realise that court cases have nothing to do with right or wrong,, but who has the most expensive lawyers.

[@johnnykeys1978]

@@bombercountyblues *and bribes

[@joeg2132]

All depends on the owner of the music. Certain "trusts" are extremely aggressive about collecting and copyright strikes, ie The Eagles, Marvin Gaye. Also the "Bittersweet Symphony" dilemma where the stones said they liked the sample and thought it was a great song, but their management said shut up we're suing them for using more than we agreed to. I'm sure many original artists simply don't care that their song was "interpolated" unless there is a substantial sum of money involved or they really don't like how it was used.

[@torrancerealestate]

This is exactly the case I was thinking of too. Crazy that Robin lost that case.

[@RobertLipe]

Lots of commenters are missing the point and even Rick didn't yet understand the key as he latched to the non-legal definition from a quick scan. Interpolating music is still creating a derived work. You still need to license it. If they are indeed interpolated riffs, they need to license it from the originals. The terms of the license may or may not require being credited. (They often do.) It seems likely the INXS riff was recognized and a deal requiring credit (and likely some payment) was reached. For the other cases, either a license was reached and no credit as required (unlikely, but possible - and we're unlikely to know if money changed hands, but again, that's likely unless they're already cooperating partners) or someone needs to have their people (the ones currently holding the license or that have the rights to act on behalf of those that do) contact the equivalent on the other side and either agree that this was indeed interpolated and reach a license (probably involving $ and credit) ... or they're going to disagree about it. When rights holders disagree about infringements, the process for resolving this involves cease and desist orders, shipment halting orders, and other lawyerly things up to and including litigation. Rick's new understanding of the term was mostly right (well, beyond the 'made up term' thing): it's a form of, uhm, "borrowing" to create a derived work, but his conclusion that it's an immediate "get out of license free" card was not. If everyone agrees (or is forced to agree by a judge) that interpolation occurred, a license must be obtained and executed. Rick's conclusion based on seeing no credits for three of the songs discussed not having seeing songwriting credits wasn't unreasonable based on such a small sample size, but the agreements may still be in progress, they may have been reached and not required credits, they may have already agreed no interpolation occurred, or they may be preparing next legal steps. These processes often take years to unfold. Well-known cases of settling interpolation (the music wasn't sampled but the underlying structure was decided similar enough to execute an co-writing license) include the Marvin Gaye/Alan Thicke spat and the Sam Smith/Tom Petty issue for "Stay With Me". The latter was settled amicably. ("These things happen....but pay me." 🙂) while the former was litigated and resulted in Gaye's estate getting a $5.3M backpayment for royalties, a slice of ongoing revenue as a writer, and he's listed as a writer on the song now. (Check Wikipedia.)

[@alekid]

Thanks for this explanation. It's clear now. This is what had to be explained in the video and wasn't.

[@RobertLipe]

@@alekid you're welcome. I agree that the speaker had a lovely opportunity to. Explain this well and just didn't. I used too many words, but a version to run over with the highlighter pen is: Interpolation, like sampling, is a way to create a derived work from an original work. It differs that the exact original material wasn't used, but rather its structure. Licensing the original and compliance with the license terms is still required.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

Interpolation MAY create a derived work. It's a question of how much the interpolated passage contributes to the final work, which is a matter for a court to decide. These songs seem pretty clear-cut, but the determination is not as automatic as you make it sound. Also, if we're being strict, only interpretation of melodic elements of copyrighted works counts. Eric Clapton interpolated an Albert King guitar solo into "Strange Brew" - King's not getting any songwriting credits on that track.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

@@CaseClash Artists who retain their rights are passing them along to their estates. The estates are selling the rights to licensing companies, The next step is for the licensing companies to be bought be the big media companies. The end game is: every pop song requires a dozen licenses, the labels manage the licensing for them in return for most of the royalties, the big media companies own the labels and the licensors both and collect all the royalties.

[@bonanzagroove]

Great summary, but I would drop the "check Wikipedia" advice. Wikipedia is a community edited blog. I have contributed to it myself. Anyone can; it's not an ultimate source of knowledge.

[@mvp019]

What nobody can legalese away is the degradation of music in the current industry. Pure digital crap.

[@rolandkarlsson7072]

Yes, and it is made by programs that have a number of algorithms and a catalogue of patterns. All this based on actual already existing music. In my book this is just as much stealing of music as someone being "highly inspired" by another song.

[@haslo_]

You must feel right at home on Rick Beato's channel, that impression of his and yours is what 3 out of 4 of his videos are about 🥰

[@cjay2]

Exactly.

[@cjay2]

@@haslo_ Yeah, it's called 'the truth'.

[@MDonovan]

Rick Beato never ripped off OG musicians as much as you did in this 👏

[@peterb2400]

Where did she say that he copied any of the songs?

[@david1610]

@@peterb2400 I think she is hitching a ride by using Rick Beato's name in the title to draw Rick's listeners here. Certainly the case with me.

[@doktabob328]

@@david1610 True. She doesn’t really add anything to the discussion.

[@shackusratus]

Aaaand most of this video is Rick...

[@69Kevrod2012]

@@doktabob328 only important thing she added is that you need permission to "interpolate" same as you do for sampling (and that credits may or may not be included depending on your deal)

[@consentofthegoverned5145]

"Who doesn't love Rick Beato...." A question that will reverberate into the universe, unanswered, forever.

[@emailchrismoll]

Me. can't stand that boomer

[@clintonwilcox4690]

Personally, as a professional musician working at the local level, there are few things more pernicious than copyright law.

[@jbkibs]

Cover songs can be played live for free but you can't put it on an album and sell it without a permission or license agreement. Interpolation = Theft with extra steps.

[@ricomajestic]

Actually cover songs can't be played live for free. Where did you get that idea from?

[@timwilliams5076]

@@ricomajestic There are plenty of bar bands that would disagree with you.

[@ricomajestic]

@@timwilliams5076 They are supposed to pay royalties to the songwriters but many never do. Most successful artists don't bother suing though since cover bands are dead broke for the most part!

[@jbkibs]

@@ricomajestic From every band in America who plays cover songs at their shows... I played in a band for 13 years and never once asked to play a cover tune at a show.

[@jbkibs]

@@ricomajestic Have you been to any festival or concert? We aren't talking "cover bands" we are talking about playing a song from another artist during a set. Majority of bands do it. Most artists don't care because they are HONORED that someone is playing their song. Unless the band is recording the show and selling it.. it's basically fair use.

[@koolythang]

You've just interpolated and sampled Rick's content without answering the question, "Is this stealing?" Ironic

[@baronvonsatan]

The question was in fact answered. You just didn't watch, or didn't understand what you were watching (which is probably more likely given this headass comment).

[@frankshailes3205]

Fair use for criticism.

[@eljison]

She did define the term and stated that it still requires a license or legal agreement.

[@MichaelPaine]

As a scientist, I've used the word interpolate for years - it means to estimate unknown data values amongst known data values.

[@MatiuPirihimana]

I love the meta-ness of this. The "interpolation" if Rick's video into yours.

[@alphamegaman8847]

Yes, I found it rather Ironic as well! 🤔 At least she gave Rick some love while using his work to provide the Majority of the content for her video! 🤨🙄

[@NoDaysOff-oz2zl]

Rick stole his video from tiktok

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

Fair Use doctrine.

[@alepolait8951]

I think in this case it was a sample, because most of this video was literally Rick's OG video.

[@mugf00t]

Art is theft. - Pablo Picaso ...This is lightly tugging on a LONG thread that spans the history of recorded music and can be seen in every form of creative expression.

[@hoikdini9263]

Famous case law is the George Harrison "My Sweet Lord" plagiarism lawsuit; Harrison claimed it was unintentional that his melody matches "He's so fine" by The Chiffons, and he lost the trial.

[@kennyg823]

There's no reason to create art when someone can just steal it because they think they can claim as it original work.

[@litterpicker1431]

This assumes that we make art for money, when in fact, some of us make art because we want it to exist.

[@AndrewAtwill]

As a lawyer, look up "My Sweet Lord", where George Harrison was sued for copyright and lost. Based on everything you've stated, he probably would not have been today. Maybe letting your viewers know how, when and why it changed removes a lot of the uncertainty?

[@doodmonkey]

The length of copyright established by the Founding Fathers was 14 years, plus the ability to renew it one time, for 14 more. 40 years later, the initial term was changed to 28 years. Then Sonny Bono and Mickey Mouse came along.

[@aelius_audio]

Good observation 👀

[@AndrewSouthworth]

Honestly feels like 28 years is more than enough. Music is very much an iterative and community-based thing, artists are constantly lifting ideas and concepts from other artists. Most of the time they transform their inspirations enough to where it isn't a problem, but it's silly when you hear about lawsuits over songs created in the 1950's when the original composer has been dead for 20 years.

[@101Mant]

​@AndrewSouthworth I don't know, big companies coming along and making a profit of someone's work and not compensating them or their family leaves a bad taste. It's not just a creative and artistic thing, its big corporate profits too.

[@AMPProf]

Yah but Fart samples bruhh

[@Guishan_Lingyou]

Reducing the length of time of copyright protection makes sense to me, but whatever the legal requirements are, giving credit to the people who's wok you make use of seems like the right thing to do.

[@wonsworld61]

thank you for explaining its not "kind of stealing" .. its actually REALLY STEALING another artists work! It amazes me with modern acts to have the balls to take another 1 or 2 musicians work. They have half a dozen writers working on a new song and STILL need to steal major elements of another song to get something listenable. Sue them for every last penny!

[@alexiskobalt7450]

What a WASTE OF TIME video. Beato explained everything in his own video and you literally added NOTHING to the conversation. What, it took too much effort to reach out to the writers of "Physical" to see if they were compensated despite not receiving credit? Or you could have contrasted compensation (but no credit) vs credit (but perhaps less upfront compensation). Good thing you're a "top" music attorney. The credibility just exudes...

[@411fritz]

What? You obviously missed the key takeaway of this video, and that is that she is a very, very important lawyer. Just look at the diplomas on the wall.

[@robertpearson8798]

@@411fritz I’ll bet that she even has the legal equivalent of the machine that goes “Ping”.

[@onufrm]

I agree - this should have been a 10 second video entitled Rick Beato is Right

[@Boethius411]

@@robertpearson8798 amplify the ping machine….

[@FrankBirtwistle]

@@onufrm Lawyers don't earn money by being quick

[@booberry6715]

I'm just a music lover but I just want to say that all this fine line drawing is why the average person rightly hates lawyers and sees them as parasites on society. They don't care what's right, only what's legal. And yes, there's very often a BIG difference.

[@OrdenJust]

I am surprised Rick has never heard the word "interpolation" before, in a music context. Jazz soloists frequently break from the melody of the jazz standard that they are playing to incorporate a fragment of another well-known song, often for humorous effect. With two players exchanging licks, one of them might suddenly play "Mary had a little lamb...", if it matches the underlying chords.

[@silverlight2004db]

yeah but jazz players call that "quoting" - i never heard it referred to as interpolation in jazz circles

[@OrdenJust]

@@silverlight2004db Perhaps the musicians themselves do not call it interpolating. But I am fairly certain some music critic/reviewer used the word to describe (in offhand fashion) what Phil Woods was doing once on a particular solo. Theoretically, one could search back-issues of Downbeat magazine to see if there are any occurrences of the word.

[@cjay2]

'interpolation' doesn't exist. It's a made-up term. Just saying.

[@OrdenJust]

@@cjay2 in·ter·po·la·tion /inˌtərpəˈlāSH(ə)n/ noun noun: interpolation; plural noun: interpolations 1. the insertion of something of a different nature into something else. "the interpolation of songs into the piece" Mathematics the insertion of an intermediate value or term into a series by estimating or calculating it from surrounding known values. "yields were estimated using linear interpolation" 2. a remark interjected in a conversation. "as the evening progressed their interpolations became more ridiculous"

[@docutainment1852]

Interpolation is like stealing a car, paint it differently and then claiming it's the thief's car.

[@monumento.f.501]

you've got a fallacy there, intangible property is different.

[@docutainment1852]

@@monumento.f.501 No, it's called copyright and intellectual property that is "repainted" aka stolen.

[@greatdude7279]

​​​​@@docutainment1852 so stealing a design of chuck taylors and making one with your own materials is same as stealing chuck taylors? Its not... infact fakes are illegal but imitations are not... you can buy imitations chuck taylors in every flea market or shop. Same is with dua lipa the song is different, the melody is different since she does it vocally and not with guitar etc... the only comparisson here to your analogy would be piracy since that is literally stealing... boomers really need to get out and touch some grass. I also find it very hypocritical that people like Rick consider Eagles and Simmons as shitty people for suing everyone and then bitch about pop artists doing things people like Eagles and Simmons sue people based on. Also funny that most band Rick and his boomer audience consider best are all thieves according to him Led Zeppelin, Nirvana and they "stole" more then just some part of the melody etc... also wikipedia is not as credible as boomers think because Dua Lipa did credit origin writters just because Wikipedia doesnt include that doesnt mean jack shit like i said touch grass.

[@docutainment1852]

@@greatdude7279 So copyright does not exist?

[@greatdude7279]

@@docutainment1852 thats a loaded question because i bet 100% you dont know jack shit about specifics that deals with copyright.... within copyright you have a scope of thousands and thousands laws. Stuff like this should be discussed with legal professionals and not boomer youtubers with degree in music. Its kinda like asking "so laws against killing dont exist" are we talkin about murder? What degree? Man slaughter? Self defense like your question is loaded and also vague since you dont specify which law was "broken" it is just "muh feels" were hurt while using analogy thats silly. Dua lipa didnt create an inxs song or take their actual song and credit herself she or they made a song thats very very different from inxs except for her vocal melody part... thats it... now if thats "theft" then let me introduce you to non-western world where almost every metal musician would be accused of stealing since they love to play around with more arabic sounds or spanish sounds. Even alot of malmsteen solos sound exactly what gipsy kings play.

[@dhaddine5472]

Pretty much no one realizes that DMX’s “Party up” was lifted from a 1930’s MGM cartoon “To Spring”.

[@Bangulo]

What time stamp?

[@ektran4205]

its a sample not the full song

[@Bangulo]

@@ektran4205 Whats the time stamp?

[@dhtsoaedsdhtnadi9575]

@@Bangulo as soon as the old man in red underwear starts singing, just after he stretches and sees the clock.

[@Bangulo]

@@dhtsoaedsdhtnadi9575 Thanks!!

[@chancechaser4487]

Interpolation is the wrong word for the concept. Interpolating means to insert something of a different nature in the main subject, like illustrations in the middle of a text. It definitely doesn't mean to grab someone else's creation and insert it in yours. Call it melody copying, because that's what it really is.

[@1mespud]

Interpolation is simply bootlegging an original song by manipulating the pitch, key, feel, timing and speed of the original therefore morphing it into a cover version.

[@ricomajestic]

Well if you change the pitch of a few notes then it is not the same melody anymore!

[@user-vf5bv6vo4b]

@@ricomajestic Yep, but still if you change it to another key but use the same pattern then it’s stealing. Ed Sharon took a Marvin Gaye tune put the chord progression in a new key and wrote a whole new melody over it. But I guess it was cool, cuz I don’t think he got sued by I could hear what he had did, but I’m a musician with perfect pitch and can interpret any chord progression and hear any melody!

[@ricomajestic]

@@user-vf5bv6vo4b Well if you mean transposing a melody to another key then yes that would be considered the same melody! Chord progressions are not copyrightable though unless it is in the form of a distinctive riff.

[@jenndavin]

I only had one law class in college. The most profound statement was that the only thing fair about the law is that it's supposed to be applied to everyone equally. Well, if that's not true, then we can all attest to the potential outcomes. Thanks for the explanation, but interpolation seems to be an interpolation of another use of that term. It all depends on what the definition of "is" is.

[@sandollor]

I understand the law here, but with artists, especially musicians, many of us consider it copying or outright stealing.

[@cjay2]

'interpolation' doesn't exist. It's a made-up term. Just saying.

[@tr-lj2vx]

One of the reasons why modern music is so awful is because of lawyers... All music is copied from generations past. But for some reason, over the last 30 years, artist's and record producers have convinced us that they own the sounds that they themselves copied. The only thing that should be copyrighted is the lyrics, beyond that, music should be public domain.

[@litterpicker1431]

Lyrics are copied too.

[@LostHate]

Vanilla Ice and David Bowie - Under Pressure is a good example. Not sampled added one extra note but was definitely the same.

[@Bass.sick.b1tch]

@@LostHate but Ice’s song went da-dun dundundun dada dun dun and Queen and Bowie’s song went dundundun dada dun dun … as Ice famously said, totally different

[@DWINC]

Vanilla Ice acrually co-owns Under Pressure. Look at the credits.

[@neilbradley]

@@DWINC That's actually false. Ice claimed he paid for it but the Queen side said that wasn't true. And Ice was sued for it.

[@davemiller6055]

@@DWINC Wrong. He claimed that but it isn't true. He settled out of court for an undisclosed sum and had to credit Queen and Bowie.

[@nicholashylton6857]

@@DWINC Mr. Van Winkle keeps making that claim, but it's just to save face.

[@Arcessitor]

Using a copyrighted scene from a movie as a meme in a video about copyright. Nobody truly cares about copyright in some philosophical or principled way, they care about money. It should honestly just be done away with.

[@paranormalinpdx]

I think they assume only a certain demographic will listen to certain music and so it won't be noticed. They're trying to turn music into the Hallmark Channel; it's the same exact movie each time they just swap the Canadian wearing the flannel, the city guy and the chick with the family ski chalet/tree farm being sold to a developer because business is bad :D

[@raygunsforronnie847]

Nope, it's not about race or idiom, it's about wholesale taking of melodies and sections of songs without compensation.

[@paranormalinpdx]

@@raygunsforronnie847 I said nothing of race, I was meaning age ,,, weird boty take

[@TheNightBadger]

@@paranormalinpdx I like your Hallmark analogy - and it does fit the demographic you seemed to be alluding to.

[@Steve-rd4kj]

You've been a lawyer for ten years. A lawyer for ten years you are. Ten years as a lawyer. Ten whole years, you, have been a lawyer.

[@RizHallowes]

Seems to me interpolation = can't write your own songs

[@BluegillGreg]

Around 4:40 you confuse "quoting" with "sampling." Actually, using an element of a song is "quoting" or "paraphrasing." "Sampling" is using part of someone's recording. In fact, a sample can be part of an audio file that is not even a recording of a song.

[@grogery1570]

I wish "Interpolation" had of been a thing when Men at Work were sued for the flute intro being "Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" The judge gave the lowest possible amount to the copyright owner which meant they lost money after they paid for lawyers. Tragically it almost bankrupted band members

[@TheNightBadger]

I've always wondered how these settlements get paid back - the record company makes more money than the artist on these songs, so do they have to pay back most of the money they got too? It just seems to be the artists...

[@grogery1570]

@@TheNightBadger In this case most of the money was paid by the record company. Unfortunately the band had to pay their own lawyers, that was what cost them the most money.

[@robertpearson8798]

Remember the old adage that “it’s better to ask for forgiveness than permission”. You only have to ask if you get caught.

[@gergelyvarga3123]

To me it seems like stealing with extra steps...

[@dongravelle1909]

It probably 'seems' like stealing to you because IT IS STEALING!

[@reverendcarter]

my experience dealing with this in the hip hop world is that most dont care who made it originally and definitely wont ask permission unless they get in trouble.

[@stevenbernfeld6415]

Because people who listen to that trash have zero intelligence.

[@temoatzinvalencia9732]

The question is. How to be safe of interpolation? To me as a listener, is totally piracy of an original melody. I agree with Rick that the word "interpolation" is simply lawyer bu11sh1t

[@jcav764]

The fact that all the songs shown are linked to the same names like Andrew Watt makes me think he's signed to the same publishing company as the songs he's stealing from. These publishing companies will look for people to remake old songs in their catalog in some shape or form. It looks like he's got free reign to go through them all and steal what he likes.

[@eljison]

I get the technical difference between "sampling" and "interpolating". I think Rick Beato gets it too, I think he is just making the point that they are both "stealing" if you have not obtained the proper license. Someone commenting about posting a cover song on KZbin. Is there a difference between recording a cover song and posting it on KZbin or including it on your own cd/lp/whatever, and playing one live? Further, playing a cover song live at an open mic without any claim to ownership of the song. A little over a decade ago there was a push from record companies to ban regular people from playing cover songs at open mics. That sounds ridiculous. I also received a copyright strike on KZbin for playing the guitar solo over a lope I made of Hotel California. I uploaded as Private, and shared it with a few friends and family member. I even wrote a disclaimer saying this is not my song and it was not in any way monetized. The whole thing seems absurd to me. If anything, when I play a cover song or portion of one, it is advertising for that particular artist and promoting their work, in some cases, maybe introducing some people to an old song they may not have heard. I never claim ownership, and I have never gotten paid for playing music.

[@neilbradley]

I have a math and science background, and interpolation in that context means something entirely different. Really they should use the word "integrating" or something similar.

[@mwright80]

Not necessarily. Interpolation implies inserting something (like new data between two data points or a snippet from one piece of music into another). Integration implies blending something (like rock end jazz into jazz fusion).

[@neilbradley]

@@mwright80 To clarify - I'm referring to when Beato was talking about interpolation in the context of what was really integration, but both were discussed. Sure, it's possible to "fill in" additional notes, which would be interpolating. Oversampling is a perfect example of (mathematical) interpolation.

[@darcyperkins7041]

​@@neilbradleyIsn't it just that the word is used differently in different contexts?

[@neilbradley]

@@darcyperkins7041 Yeah, basically, but the point being there are better words to describe it.

[@mwright80]

​@@neilbradleyIt's debatable whether the examples are interpolations or integrations, and we may simply have to accept a legal definition. But from a musical standpoint, interpolations are common in jazz when a musician quotes a familiar melody while improvising (something Rick should clearly understand). So that's what I'm thinking. But I see your points.

[@kylecolley7294]

For everyone struggling with the wordage here, lemme try to simplify it a little bit: First you have the ability and concept to "Interpret" something, ie: To understand something, or "how" you understand something Next we have the concept of making something "Interpret-able", ie: To make something understandable; to convert it; or to rewrite it Then come the wider aspect of "Interpolation". Which is more of a broad descriptor of when "some or all of the acts of "all the above"" are present at once. So be it a story, a song, a painting, etc etc. being recycled, reused, repurposed, or reinterpreted into something "new" in it's own right, ie: their "Interpretation" - all falls UNDER the description of "Interpolation".

[@peteratlanecove7436]

There was the Men at Work Flautist who ended his life because a line of his solo on Land Down Under sounded a bit like "Kookuburra Sits ..." ? There is a flip side when copyright owners go too hard. As John Gardner wrote "balance is everything". Thanks for explaining this.

[@cs292]

Interpolation=writers get paid, young and uneducated people get duped.

[@NTC_Transport]

Yeah, I remember Queen & David Bowie suing Vanilla Ice over his use of their bass line from Under Pressure, in Ice Ice Baby. Apparently "Interpolation" didn't exist in the 80's. They threatened to sue him for Copyright infringement, and he ended up buying the rights, because he would have lost in court.

[@GavinEhringer]

Among the earliest cases of "interpolation" was The Beach Boys "Surfing' USA" and Chuck Berry's "Sweet Little Sixteen." Originally, the song was credited to The Beach Boys Brian Wilson, but Berry was given full song writing credit (and royalty income) as the song's writer, despite the lyrics being Dennis Wilson's own.

[@geoffallan3804]

Not to defend Vanilla Ice, but I believe that bass line was sampled, and was one of the reasons they drew the line at sampling.

[@101Mant]

Bo he ended up paying then but he didn't own the rights. He thought he did and said so but he just had the rights to use it in that song. He doesn't own the rights to Under Pressure.

[@NTC_Transport]

@@geoffallan3804 Except his "defense" was that he had added an extra note. AFAIK it wasn't sampled, especially since in those days, computer memory was counted in Kilobytes.

[@cjay2]

@@GavinEhringer 'interpolation' doesn't exist. It's a made-up term. Just saying.

[@terry2315]

Sometimes songs are going to have similar chord structures and such. The Red Hot Chili Peppers "Dani California" is very similar to Tom Petty's "Last Dance with Mary Jane." You are going to be influenced by the artists you listen to, it's why you play music. The stuff Beato is showing is just in some cases stealing, in some re-imagining. This has happened forever. George Harrison did it.

[@cheriremily9360]

If interpolation is so okay now, why did The Verve get their ass handed to them by The Rolling Stones. It's stealing unless the artist has gotten permission like Stevie Nicks got permission to use a bit of the melody from Little Red Corvette in Stand Back with Prince's permission and with Prince helping her out on the song as well. No matter what word we use it is copyright infringement unless there is permission of usage. It's also just plan laziness as well. I can't imagine Elton John interpolating his melodies.

[@joeg2132]

They had a very specific agreement and the Verve used too much of the sample. The stones "owner" wouldn't budge and demanded 100% profits. Was a mess, he's an asshole.

[@jonwalter6317]

My older sister was married to a lawyer for about 10 years. They divorced and she married a used car salesman a few years later. When my father met #2, he said "used car salesman huh? At least you're not a lawyer."

[@PontiacS]

The Entire Oasis catalogue is "Interpolation". How much Modern music comes from Classical music? Alot.

[@robertm3951]

Vintage classical music is public domain

[@BluegillGreg]

Around 5:02 you state that by using someone else's melody you are making all new parts. This is absurd. Performing and recording someone else's composition is NOT creating an all-new work of all new parts.

[@Reginaldborington]

Money and popularity trumps all. Dua Lipa can get away with it because it's unlikely anyone wants to go toe to toe with her and the resources she'll have. Meanwhile, you have Bryan Adams issuing copyright strikes to tiny independent artists for doing unique original cover songs of his tracks because he can. But Dua Lipa can rip off actual main stream chart music and goes unchallenged.

[@raygunsforronnie847]

Mr Adams owns the rights to his songs. On YT, the copyright system presumes that all royalties go to the rights holders. In this case the video of a cover would be "demonetized" for the cover poster and any revenue from the YT plays would go to the rights holders. As for Dua Lipa, I'm guessing she has the same lawyers and managers as the people whose works have been used, so there is a conflict of interest, but yeah, it's a big money machine and to play the game you need big money.

[@Reginaldborington]

@@raygunsforronnie847 Mr Adams isn't requesting the money, that's why I said "copyright strike" not a content ID claim. He's issuing DMCA takedown requests to entirely remove the cover songs from existence, the type of strike where if you get 3 then you're deleted. There's a general agreement in place that allows cover songs on social media even though they infringe copyright, everyone is generally in agreement that they're good for the entire industry and all parties providing you license the sale of a cover. If Mr Adams's behaviour became the normal, the music industry would collapse. KZbin music scene is built on cover songs, Tiktok is too, most of todays new generation of artists got popular through building an audience via cover songs first. His behaviour is deplorable and if Adele, Coldplay, Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Sabrina whatsherface, if they all did it too... you'd have nothing but sterile official music videos online.

[@raygunsforronnie847]

@@Reginaldborington This is a failure of the You Tube system and the inadequacy of the law to keep up with technology, and of musicians to properly handle the copyright of their covers.

[@thewaldfe9763]

well, it could well be that these other main stream artists do reach out to Dua Lipa's label and just get a very good deal without going to court. A relative of mine was a lawyer and his approach was avoiding legal troubles by setting up contracts correctly and trying to find a solution outside of court. Probably for most (good) lawyers, going to court is the last resort.

[@rachelcolomb]

I'd say she licensed the use of the riff that is why there is no issue because she did it legally.

[@robertstan2349]

contemporary culture is exhausted. it has nothing left and all it can do is regurgitate, badly.

[@ollybausor9384]

It seems sticky, and a slight loophole. Ed Sheeran, and Robin Thicke surely could have argued this in their cases, also, as Ed Sheeran has pointed out, there is the 4 chord method that can be used for hundreds of pop songs. End of the day, only so many chords, and sometimes they're bound to align and sound similar, because they work as combination and fit the song. This is sometimes how we can be "inspired" by artists when writing material. Loads of examples out there 🙂

[@cmorrow74]

@@ollybausor9384 “Similar chord progressions” are not the same as note-for-note, rhythm-for-rhythm ripoffs, as with the Dua Lipa/INXS connection. I’ll give Dua Lipa props for crediting the original melody writers, but she’s still a symptom of a larger problem of creative bankruptcy in modern musical entertainment.

[@chrisschack9716]

If you want a good laugh about chord progressions being in common, look up the "Pachelbel Rant"

[@BobK115]

I lost all respect for Ed Sheeran when “Thinking Out Loud” gave zero credit to Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On.” Amazing how he got away with that.

[@user-vf5bv6vo4b]

@@BobK115Correct, he just moved the chord progression to a new key and wrote a slightly new melody but it still sounded like let’s get it on and that’s what I said when I first heard it. I was never a huge Ed Sharon fan anyway!!

[@indetigersscifireview4360]

Mr. Smith "Johnson in my office now"! Johnson in Mr. Smith's office "You wanted to see me sir"? Mr. Smith "Yes Johnson, it's about this report you handed in. It's an exact copy of Ms. Anderson's report from three weeks ago". How do you explain that"? Johnson "It's an homage to her work sir". Mr. Smith "An homage "? Johnson "Yessir. I admire her work so much I wanted to pay tribute to it". Mr. Smith "How isn't that stealing Johnson"? Johnson "I used a different font sir". Mr. Smith "Ahh, I see, very well then Johnson. You're free to go".

[@legman1476]

The Miley song also "borrows" from "Two Of Hearts" by Stacey Q and written by John Mitchell. Sidebar, Hall of Fame members Green Day are notorious song stealers. There are several YT videos showing examples. Led Zep, yeah, they're thieves too. Many vids showing examples of that. One Direction, almost every hit they had was stolen, quite a few from the Who.

[@dohanddonuts5716]

I actually thought of "Two of Hearts" before "Need You Tonight."

[@legman1476]

@@dohanddonuts5716 Me too and I'm a massive INXS fan.

[@Bacopa68]

This is why all my interpolations come from Bach. Dude is never gonna sue me. And in fact, a bunch of hits in the 70s and 80s were laid over Bach's Little Fugue in G Minor chords and interpolated its main themes for the melody. But "Gonna Fly Now", "I Will Survive" and "The Final Countdown" don't really sound that similar. None of them are exactly the same as Bach either. Fair interpolation should be showing that you were inspired by something, but you changed it and put it in a new context. The whole Nirvana/Killing Joke debate is a good example.

[@TheSteveBoyd]

I commented on Rick's channel about this. Look at the track listing for Pink Floyd's 1971 release "Meddle". One of my favorite songs from that record (so much so that I recently released a cover version under my professional name, Rev Elvis Lee Morrison), is called "Fearless (Interpolating "You'll Never Walk Alone")". This is not a new concept, but it seems the accepted definition has changed a little bit. In 1971, Pink Floyd uses "interpolating" to describe a crossfade into a Liverpool soccer chant - quite different than today's definition of not being able to come up with an original melody... Says the guy who just admitted he recorded a cover song (Rev Elvis Lee Morrison. Spotify. Shameless plug).✌

[@15thBend]

i just checked out ur song "The day will come" on ur channel... frikkin love it!!!

[@dohanddonuts5716]

⬅️⬅️⬅️ The best fans ever.

[@TiB0Ytel]

I wish he had brought you or any music business lawyer on for this video instead of just ranting to the camera about how "contemporary artists are just stealing melodies from older songs". I hope he does that in the future. Imo it would make a much better video.

[@4dmind]

Well, there are only 12 notes in a western scale, so melody reuse is going to happen. But when the rhythm, swing and groove is the same, then to me, that is a problem. Can't wait to hear what your legal opinion is...

[@MontyCraig]

It's not the 12 notes, rhythm is vast.

[@fideoioioi]

@@MontyCraig what?

[@user-vf5bv6vo4b]

@@MontyCraigIt’s all that bruh!

[@MultiEviscerator]

Just because someone is not using the lyrics of a song, most of the songs musical score is that artists intellectual property. For example, Don Felder of the Eagles wrote all of the music to Hotel California. The two lyric writes were Frey & Henley. However without the music, they never would have written the lyrics. So if someone were to take the music without giving credit and money to the Eagles, rest assured lawsuits would ensue as Henley is infamous for suing people, even for just playing a clip of their music without permission.

[@Music--ng8cd]

The best example is one that never went to court: The Layla Coda was taken directly from Rita Coolidge's Time.

[@dazrhys7983]

Didnt know that til you just pointed it out and listened. Wow no mistaking it direct rip off. She had left the demo of her track with Eric Clapton wanting him to record her song. He did and stole it. She never got any credit. There's a video of her talking about the incident. Disgusting

[@pyr8dude781]

@@Music--ng8cd Another Professor of Rock fan?

[@Music--ng8cd]

@@pyr8dude781 I watch that channel sometimes. Never knew that they ripped off the whole song from her until I saw that episode though. I always thought it was just the piano coda.

[@adamtparker6515]

Explains the later interpolation of Riva recording artist John Cougar "Hand To Hold On To" which his next album singles were credited to "Little Bastard' as producer.

[@adamtparker6515]

​@@dazrhys7983sometimes there are pre-planned sound alikes as to bind works of Rita and Eric Clapton. RSO "shocked the world" ca 78 announcing they are the foremost "Publisher" of modern music. I would say most of the industry did a spit take including the then label artists like Clapton, Player, Bee Gees etc😮😊

[@pauldbrown1010]

It should be "extrapolation". Interpolation means adjusting the existing elements, but not introducing new ones, whereas what's being done is adding new tones, timing nuances etc to avoid outright infringement. That's extrapolation.

[@TaiChiBeMe]

In digital photography, interpolation is a mathematical calculation whereby you create new data points (not real captured data points) in-between "real" data points captured with a digital camera. For example, if you photograph a ball with a camera, that camera's capture devise has a limited number of pixels it can record. When enlarging that ball, the edges of the ball will begin to "stepladder" because all of the edges of the ball has not been captured. It may look great as a small photograph, but since the capture devise recorded a limited number of pixels, the edge of the ball will not be smooth. Instead the edge of the ball will "step ladder" down producing a "circle." But by "interpolating" the data points from one another, we can create false data points to make the image look smoother. Not only can we create a smoother ball, we can use the math to create a slightly different shade of color that would exist between the data points. In this way, we can create a large photograph where the "real" data is comprised of only 10% of the produced photograph. This depends on the final size of the photograph made.This is not the case when making photographs from film.

[@dhtsoaedsdhtnadi9575]

irrelevant, and there's a difference between devise and device.

[@poissonpuerile8897]

The thing is, Dua Lipa is doing _way_ more than "interpolating" other songs' melodies here -- she's also copying their chords and to a large extent their rhythms.

[@Mikearice1]

Considering that sampling wasn't really much of a thing until the 90's, what's called interpolation now is probably what USED to be just considered plagiarism. Outright directly taking the actual sound in a sample used to be beyond consideration -- of course you couldn't get away with that., etc.. ... and 35 years ago, that was part of why older generations didn't consider rap "legitimate" music. They, and electronic musicians, were the only ones using samples on a regular basis, so interpolation was pretty much ALL plagiarism that was happening.

[@josephwest124]

Actually, the first major rap song to hit the scene ("Rapper's Delight" by the Sugarhill Gang) explicitly used Chic's "Good Times" to form its "melody." That was in late 1979, literally just months after Chic released "Good Times." It was only the early 90s when artists like George Clinton and James Brown started getting a bit cheesed off at not getting paid for their works which were being sampled that things came to a head. Vanilla Ice pretty much break the story with his clear sampling but the Turtles sued De La Soul for an unlicensed sample of "You Showed Me" on the track "Live Transmitting from Mars" on the group's debut album (and all the samples that De La Soul used throughout their catalog is why it took so long for the group to show up on digital music services). But what really changed things was when Gilbert O'Sullivan sued Biz Markie over the track "Alone Again" which sampled O'Sullivan's "Alone Again Naturally" without permission. O'Sullivan didn't want royalties; he had the album pulled from the market until it could be released with that track.

[@Mikearice1]

@@josephwest124 Electronic sampling (that you could play instantly on cue) was brand new and expensive in the 80's, so not common. It existed but most normal people didn't have the equipment to do it. (I got into synths in the 90's and affordable sampler keyboards were brand new then.) Personal computers weren't regularly used for sound recording until the late 90's and early 2000s. And making and using samples on analog equipment is not like doing it on a DAW now.

[@QuantumOptix]

@@Mikearice1 They probably just used a tape loop which was standard equipment in most studios at the time, depeche mode for instance used tape loops for drums in their live performances as early as 1980 it was nothing crazy. Also 'Twist & Shout' is a rewriting of 'La bamba' which itself is a rock version of an old mexican folk song, 'Surfing Bird' by The Trashmen is a mash up of two other songs by another band. A lot of 50's/60's doo wop, blues, and rock songs were rip offs of other songs, celtic folk music contains countless derivatives of its standards which are just different versions of the same song as is tradition for a lot of folk music.

[@aronbaumel]

Except that it’s as old as recorded music. Lots of examples of famous songs from the 50s, 60s, and 70s (pre sampling) borrowing melodies, hooks, lyrics from other artists… albeit it was usually done more as a tip of the cap, musically “quoting” an influence.

[@Fire-Toolz]

it blew up in the 80s & started in the late 70s.

[@tasujturlaj5272]

So, there's one option: you pay for using part of someone's song in your song, adding this person in the credits. But There's also other option: you don't want to share with the author of original music your royalties of HIS/HER work. It means you INTERPOLATE his song in yours and get all the money.

[@smkh2890]

Interesting case in Australia : Men at Work had a famous song 'Down Under' , in which a tune from a children's nursery rhyme ""Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree" got 'interpolated' into their hit. Eventually they had to pay up.

[@skoughtw]

Administration of the case cost 4.5 million. The plaintiff yielded approximately $100,000 for the effort.

[@johnnykeys1978]

@@skoughtw didn't the plaintiff buy the rights of kookaburra, specifically to sue?

[@Kieop]

That's weird. You'd think most nursery rhymes would be public domain.

[@dohanddonuts5716]

​​@@johnnykeys1978​I actually looked this up a couple of months ago. Larrikin Music bought the rights to it in 1990. Then waited 19 years to sue Men At Work. Which is sad since practically everyone in Australia knew both tunes. Larrikin Music wanted 60% of royalties but got only 5% and only going back to 2002 and on. They couldn't collect on anything before that year due to statue to limitations. The decision deeply hurt the flautist Greg Ham whose drug habit sprialed out of his control.

[@RossG61]

Although it is understood that Greg Ham, the flautist, died of a heart attack, there was much speculation that he was soo bummed about it, that his depressive state deteriorated, and the poor guy took his own life. A tragic end. For what it's worth, for me, those 8 or 9 notes barely constitute plagiarism even though they are very similar. In isolation maybe, but in the song's context, no.

[@neilpatrickhairless]

remember that time your band or label hired Rick Beato to do anything? Yeah, me neither

[@dmthandmade5674]

The TL:DR is Yes,' Yes it is exactly what Rick said. Something Lawyers made up to enable their clients to steal. If the melody is only a minor part of the new creation or if it is a satire or a parody, that is fair enough, absolutely fair game. If it's the main riff, the chorus, the hook, and it's being used completely unironically ( because '...it's a great melody...' that someone, another artist wrote but moving swiftly along ) Then the 'artist' is just a thief who should maybe write some great melodies of their own , if they could. They may not be not legally, officially a thief in the eyes of the law, but we all know how the law differs from reality in all sorts of ways. This is one. Whether they're allowed to do it or not depends on who has the deepest pockets for lawyers (who deal in law, not justice , morals, ethics so save the crying about those things). If a normal 10 year old can't know and understand all the laws and their penalty, you've got too many and your nation and people are doomed.

[@olev01]

Hi Top Music Attorney! I think it's really great that you and @RickBeato have messaged each other. I really hope that you and he will make a joint vid on KZbin - could well be a question-&-answer kinda thing. This was really interesting! Thx.

[@HeadbangersLocal]

“Maybe they just don’t care.” Im sure KISS (Paul Stanley and Gene Simmons) care . I mean the guy walks around with a money hat on for Gods sake . My theory is, like you said, a deal was done between them privately for $$$ and they agreed to not be credited . KISS have like the best attorneys in the biz ( present company excluded of course) so it’s highly unlikely IMO they just “don’t care”

[@AnoshterHaar]

@@HeadbangersLocal but why would you. Why would money be enough to not be credited for work you actually have the full rights of? How bad is it for a label or artist to have to pay less and just credit them alongside the other writers? What harm does it do? Almost nobody will look it up either way. And you could argue that controversial discoveries about songs being related to eachother only seem to be even worse if the artists that they borrowed from are not credited at all. You could argue that it would create more fuzz and more controversy about the possible copyright infringment (no good pr) if the song didn't have the credits... What is the purpose of paying even more to the original creators to not even be credited for their own work? Explain me please cause I don't see it. Which is why it seems to a lot of people that they just did not care and did not make a deal. If you make a deal, why bother with not crediting? Who are you helping with buying original creators out to make them lie that they didn't write it or something. Just stupid imo.

[@HeadbangersLocal]

@@AnoshterHaar just because they don’t have song credits on Wikipedia doesn’t mean there isn’t something else being done . My point is that KISS doesn’t just not care or let things go . There are decades of evidence to support this . That’s all I’m saying .

[@AnoshterHaar]

@@HeadbangersLocal no sure. I get it. There can be secret deals and stuff. But I don't see why any party, both on the borrowing side and the original creator side would want to make such deal. What benefit does it have to not credit the original writer?

[@Robtwenty-six]

@@AnoshterHaarmaybe Kiss wants the money but doesn’t want their name associated with a Dua Lipa song.

[@AnoshterHaar]

@@Robtwenty-six why would you not want that if it becomes another hitsong? It only credits your work and makes you be honored for it...

[@JornKnuttila]

Yeah, imagine using a whole bunch of somebody else’s content and then publishing it so you can make money on it. That does sound like an awful thing to do

[@adamdiaz6898]

Rick is the man! Great producer.

[@unduloid]

Really? What did he produce?

[@DWINC]

@@unduloida LOT…..

[@perwestermark8920]

​@@unduloid That's a question you should visit Discogs to look for. Under discography credits there are 148 entries.

[@littlechicago7482]

@@unduloid 61 production credits according to the Discogs web site

[@JordanRud]

So comparing 5 seconds of a song with 5 seconds of another song proves something?

[@WarValkyrie]

interpilation is just legal speak for stealing without admitting that u r sstealing

[@ScubaSteveCanada]

I had a big fight with YT & a third party that claimed ownership of one of my own songs. I had to involve YT, the band management, the band, and the music company (that licensed my use of the sample). I wondered why YT did *not* provide me with the contact information for the third party. Under YT's own terms of copyright, they must do this. 3 - 4 months later it was all solved in my favour. Of course, the third party turned out to be a Russian company trying to grab my copyright.

[@johnvrabec9747]

Interpolate is actually a good way to describe what the artist is doing. This is used in math, to calculate different results from the same data points. We typically hear :interpolate" and "extrapolate", which is continuing the function based on current trends.

[@thewaldfe9763]

@@johnvrabec9747 however, the point of interpolation (and extrapolation) is creating/estimating new results that haven't been around before based on known values. So if you would ONLY use these newly created values (or notes, harmonies, rhythms etc.) you would actually end up with something new, not with a copy of it - you could hear what it may be inspired by, but it would be clearly something new. If you use interpolation/extrapolation including the known values you would end up with a re-interpretation, hence something that has been called cover for ever.

[@BluegillGreg]

In 2015 the heirs of Marvin Gaye took millions of dollars from the copyright holders of completely original music produced as an appreciation of their Father. The successful argument was that although the melody, harmony, rhythm, lyrics, and structure were newly composed and completely unrelated to a particular song of their Father's, the new song did succeed in evoking feelings of fond remembrance among listeners. It's interesting that these heirs are grandchildren of the man who murdered Marvin. The decision was protested by hundreds of knowledgeable, financially successful musicians, many of whom filed amicus briefs with the courts, but the foul decision was upheld through two appeals. The business of music is often done by evil professionals capitalizing on the musical incompetence of judges, lawyers, and juries, and taking for granted the legal incompetence of musicians.

[@ladyibiscus6940]

I've heard it's common for songwriters and producers prior to writing a song, to sit in a room and brainstorm what they want to write, the vibe and who they want they song to sound like, even listening to tracks they want their song to sound like. That's dangerous. Cause you push the line of whose song you want your song to sound like a bit too far, and you get straight up plagiarism, especially for these busy songwriters and producers who work like line workers in factories to finish songs, albums cause they have short deadlines.

[@jerrywemhoff]

as a composer and a student of copyright law (just one semester, I'm no expert) I can say without a doubt that he's legally wrong using words like 'identical'.

[@krempel_und_klumpad]

haha rick beato must be the living nightmare of every gen z "artist". that guy knows just about every song under the sun - and he even knows half of all musicians/songwriters/producers of the past 5 decades in person😄

[@trapkat8213]

To be honest, I didn't learn anything from your video. What musicians want to know is simple: Is it legal to 'interpolate' without permission?

[@cerebrumexcrement]

how has this guy survived this long and not know what interpolation means. its been around for ages.

[@nitehike]

aren’t reaction videos (such as this) the same as sampling? it seems to me that there is rarely any intellectual property protection in social media. for example: you could create a meme and inly get a few likes and shares, then an “influencer” shares it, it goes viral and the author would not even get credit. it’s a weird world. at least interpolation has some originality mixed in. there are, after all, only 12 notes.