I got a major issue with this case and this take. Steely and Cleevie made something very influential that is undeniable. How many times in the history of reggaeton or the artists in this lawsuit have they ever given Steely and Cleevie credit, acknowledgment or any kind of payment even when they sampled their master recording? This answer is never. Personally i think that egregious and it hurts to know that S & C after giving so much to music ,knowing they could not be compensated and credited for their contribution is 💔. Emotions aside reggaeton was build off of that riddim. The riddim isnt just a bunch of sounds . Its a unique groove , and “vibe” in combination with those sounds. In my opinion this is a bigger offense than the Pharrell Williams v. Bridgeport Music. You conveniently glossed over this case and its details because it didn’t fit your narrative. So much so that you gave the wrong year for that case. If we try to use this same logic with a modern riddim you would see how egregious this is. Let’s take the Diwali riddim ( Sean Paul’s “get busy”) . There is no way an entire genre can be built off of that riddim without Lenky ( the producer) being compensated. I don’t believe a judgement for S & C will have a negative impact on music. I do wish that the copyright laws were enhanced so that it does not stifle future creativity and allows people to create derivative compositions while properly compensating the originators.
I understand your concerns about the Steely & Clevie case and the broader implications for the music industry. Your points about their lack of credit and compensation are valid, and it's essential to acknowledge the impact they've had on the genre. The heart of the matter lies in recognizing and respecting the contributions that artists and producers make to the music landscape. It's true that the issue goes beyond just the technical elements of a rhythm. Steely & Clevie's work has been influential and instrumental in shaping the sound of Reggaetón. The unique groove and "vibe" that you mention are artistic elements that have left an indelible mark on the genre. It's not merely about a collection of sounds; it's about the creative essence they infused into their work. In a way, this situation bears similarities to other cases in music history where artists and producers weren't properly credited or compensated for their contributions. Your comparison to the Diwali riddim is apt; indeed, recognizing the originators and compensating them for their influence is a critical step towards fairness in creative collaboration. While I do understand concerns about potential stifling of creativity, I believe there's a way to strike a balance. Enhancing copyright laws to protect originators while allowing for derivative compositions could be a step forward. This would ensure that those who lay the foundation for a genre or a style are rightfully acknowledged and compensated, without impeding the creative process for future generations. At the heart of the matter is the idea that artists and producers should be able to build upon each other's work while respecting the origins. It's about finding a way to foster innovation and creativity within a framework that honors artistic contributions. The Steely & Clevie case serves as a reminder of the need for equitable practices in the music industry, where creators are rightfully recognized for their invaluable contributions to the evolving landscape of music.
Everything I have read claims that drum patterns are unprotected by copyright. They would also have to prove nobody used that drum pattern before them.
I think the issue is not paying homage to Jamaicans who created reggae, influenced panamanians like el general which birthed reggaeton, there would be no reggaeton without Jamaicans
True not the same. Ellos benia isn’t reggaeton. It’s a Spanish interpretation of reggae. There’s definitely a difference and if Nando sampled steely and Clevie, he definitely owes them residual payment.
@@verdadduele7925 Steely and Clevie lacked copyright registrations for the Pounder Riddim and only secured registration for the Pounder Dub Mix II sound recording in March 2023, two years after filing the lawsuit. However, Shelly's Records joined Steely & Clevie in this lawsuit. U.S. regulations require copyright registrations before a suit is commenced.
@@verdadduele7925 The plaintiffs (Steely & Clevie) didn't register a copyright for "Pounder Dub Mix II" until March of this year after they found an heir to the producer (Count Shelly) of the track.
True..
Update Part 4 - th-cam.com/video/-XdjidPVl3g/w-d-xo.html
I got a major issue with this case and this take. Steely and Cleevie made something very influential that is undeniable. How many times in the history of reggaeton or the artists in this lawsuit have they ever given Steely and Cleevie credit, acknowledgment or any kind of payment even when they sampled their master recording? This answer is never. Personally i think that egregious and it hurts to know that S & C after giving so much to music ,knowing they could not be compensated and credited for their contribution is 💔. Emotions aside reggaeton was build off of that riddim. The riddim isnt just a bunch of sounds . Its a unique groove , and “vibe” in combination with those sounds. In my opinion this is a bigger offense than the Pharrell Williams v. Bridgeport Music. You conveniently glossed over this case and its details because it didn’t fit your narrative. So much so that you gave the wrong year for that case.
If we try to use this same logic with a modern riddim you would see how egregious this is. Let’s take the Diwali riddim ( Sean Paul’s “get busy”) . There is no way an entire genre can be built off of that riddim without Lenky ( the producer) being compensated.
I don’t believe a judgement for S & C will have a negative impact on music. I do wish that the copyright laws were enhanced so that it does not stifle future creativity and allows people to create derivative compositions while properly compensating the originators.
I understand your concerns about the Steely & Clevie case and the broader implications for the music industry. Your points about their lack of credit and compensation are valid, and it's essential to acknowledge the impact they've had on the genre. The heart of the matter lies in recognizing and respecting the contributions that artists and producers make to the music landscape.
It's true that the issue goes beyond just the technical elements of a rhythm. Steely & Clevie's work has been influential and instrumental in shaping the sound of Reggaetón. The unique groove and "vibe" that you mention are artistic elements that have left an indelible mark on the genre. It's not merely about a collection of sounds; it's about the creative essence they infused into their work.
In a way, this situation bears similarities to other cases in music history where artists and producers weren't properly credited or compensated for their contributions. Your comparison to the Diwali riddim is apt; indeed, recognizing the originators and compensating them for their influence is a critical step towards fairness in creative collaboration.
While I do understand concerns about potential stifling of creativity, I believe there's a way to strike a balance. Enhancing copyright laws to protect originators while allowing for derivative compositions could be a step forward. This would ensure that those who lay the foundation for a genre or a style are rightfully acknowledged and compensated, without impeding the creative process for future generations.
At the heart of the matter is the idea that artists and producers should be able to build upon each other's work while respecting the origins. It's about finding a way to foster innovation and creativity within a framework that honors artistic contributions. The Steely & Clevie case serves as a reminder of the need for equitable practices in the music industry, where creators are rightfully recognized for their invaluable contributions to the evolving landscape of music.
Everything I have read claims that drum patterns are unprotected by copyright. They would also have to prove nobody used that drum pattern before them.
Update Part 4 - th-cam.com/video/-XdjidPVl3g/w-d-xo.html
This is super informative and interesting. Thank you for the claro
You’re welcome! Gonna keep people informed properly
Shabba did dem bow.look it up.
I covered that in part 1
Looking for part 1
@@kutchie420 th-cam.com/video/lTVRMJ1D8dE/w-d-xo.htmlsi=el6w4de6xqzx8mXI
Thanks
Update Part 4 - th-cam.com/video/-XdjidPVl3g/w-d-xo.html
I think the issue is not paying homage to Jamaicans who created reggae, influenced panamanians like el general which birthed reggaeton, there would be no reggaeton without Jamaicans
Para los que alegan que el reggaetón se inventó en Panama. Si aha !
Fish market and pounder are not the same fyi please look up ellos benia by nando boom
True not the same. Ellos benia isn’t reggaeton. It’s a Spanish interpretation of reggae. There’s definitely a difference and if Nando sampled steely and Clevie, he definitely owes them residual payment.
@@sazonbooyaDennis da menace was the producer for Ellos Benia and had permission to use the riddim. No law suit there.
@verdadduele7925 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
@@verdadduele7925 Steely and Clevie lacked copyright registrations for the Pounder Riddim and only secured registration for the Pounder Dub Mix II sound recording in March 2023, two years after filing the lawsuit. However, Shelly's Records joined Steely & Clevie in this lawsuit. U.S. regulations require copyright registrations before a suit is commenced.
@@verdadduele7925 The plaintiffs (Steely & Clevie) didn't register a copyright for "Pounder Dub Mix II" until March of this year after they found an heir to the producer (Count Shelly) of the track.
Be original and you can’t top the original music.. ppl know .. create your music don’t use original to create your own sound.. Jamaica sooo many
Update Part 4 - th-cam.com/video/-XdjidPVl3g/w-d-xo.html
Cleeeeeeveeeee
Update Part 4 - th-cam.com/video/-XdjidPVl3g/w-d-xo.html