Actually, it's funny but it is totally legal to COVER any tune you
want. You just have to pay royalties for each copy sold (and I assume
nothing if it is just for personal use). So if you are a good producer
you could quite possibly recreate a very close approximation of the
track you want.
So, I wonder how producers feel about other people covering their
tracks? I know UR was pissed about the trance Jaguar cover - but
covering tracks is totally legal. And we would have never got to
experience things like John Coltrane's amazing rendition of "My Favorite
Things", for instance, if it wasn't legal. Royalties have to be paid to
the composer though.
I may be off base here, but I feel that system is a reasonable one, and
wish that after a certain amount of time, there were a similar royalty
system for sound recordings, or at least samples. So that it is legal
to sample but you have to pay a royalty on each copy sold, but you don't
have negotiate on a track by track basis...
BTW, I should say for the record that I have mixed feelings about
bootlegging; I don't approve of the Buzz boots. I wouldn't buy them -
but I would not hesitate to illegally record a copy if a friend had an
original.
But what I want to know is, why is it okay for Theo Parrish to do
bootlegs, but not for someone to boot Buzz compilations???
~David
Personally speaking ... if it's really strong, channel that feeling into a new track as an homage to the futility of being a record freak. More productive and feels better at the end of the day. But to each his own.
