Posts 1 - 12 of 12
  1. 480306
    MinkSoda : Sat 3rd Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    I think it would be a good idea if Looperman changed the wording on its website regarding posted material such as:

    123674 Royalty Free Audio Loops, Wavs, Samples & Sounds
    There are currently 123674 free audio loops & samples in our database. New free music loops uploaded every day by our users. All our music loops and sounds are 100% free to use in your projects.

    11315 Acapellas, Vocals, Raps, Singing and Spoken Word
    Download from our catalogue of 11315 acapellas, vocal samples & spoken word and start creating music today. We have male vocals, female acapellas, full songs or vocal hooks in a variety of tempos, genres and keys.

    Nobody likes Defamation which can happen from reading the Home Page of Looperman. If there's no using posted material this statement is misleading and should be edited. Thanks

  2. 186161
    Spivkurl : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    What is the defamation you speak of?

  3. 1077378
    Alien : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    I am trying to follow you here but I cannot. Can you be a little more specific?

  4. 480306
    MinkSoda : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    Spivkurl, lets just say I adopted a vocal track into a music track and in the comment section it said not for commercial use, also that if you did use the track and posted it on you tube you had to title it giving credit to the vocalist in a certain way and also that they would have 'exclusive' rights to monetize the video. I didn't make a video but I did use the vocal with my original music and posted on an outside site non-commercially. Two years later I was invited to submit to an opportunity for placement in TV, movies, etc., so I wrote an email to the person who posted the vocal and asked if they would be interested in letting me submit it with my music and the only reply I got was a 'copyright strike' from the other web site. It's like this permanent strike that appears on my track list whenever I log on and it annoys the hell out of me, anyway my point was that I wasn't about to submit anything without permission first and when I sought permission that's what I got. It's no big deal now but very embarrassing and the terms and conditions of the website say they can share any information good or bad about conduct of their contributors to anybody anywhere anytime. It's like a permanent mark standing out there like a sore thumb.

  5. 480306
    MinkSoda : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    I'm not going to say who the other party was, it's not worth it and water under the bridge now, except for that ever present notice on my track list that's the thing that bugs me.

  6. 2615019
    Unknown User : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    im a bit confused I think what your saying is that looperman is advertizeing free loops and acapelas but every member knows acapelas can be used with permission only is that what your saying windy city nice song by the way on ur page

  7. 2615019
    Unknown User : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    thing is copying always takes place even in the professional business of the music industry in most cases there is nothing you can do as leagle fees wont be worth the trile for even famouse musicians un less your making millions on there material then it becomes worth persuing and you must have copy rights too bring to court

  8. 2615019
    Unknown User : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    like an invention you need to patten it cost mony not free you cant just assume its leagly copyrited with out paying too patten it

  9. 2615019
    Unknown User : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    if you just say copywrited that works with websights but courts want too see the leagle pappers from the company that copy writed it for you and your fees or its thrown out of court

  10. 2615019
    Unknown User : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    if you have your copyrights you can copy them and submit too youtube if not then its a free for all

  11. 1223101
    topclass : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    but i for 1 have to say that windy is making a very good point on here

  12. 1041668
    wikkid : Sun 4th Nov 2018 : 3 years ago

    Dear OP,

    I can only go by what you state in your example, so please fill in anything that I don't have correct:

    You stated: "I adopted a vocal track into a music track and in the comment section it said not for commercial use"

    Then you put the completed music track on a site (though your example gets a little hazy here. Were downloads allowed? Donations?). And while you believe you did the honorable thing by crediting the artist, you may have created a popular "commercial" tune I suspect, but only you can confirm, that outside agencies became interested in.

    It's been up over two years and probably made its way around the internet (Anyone can download from You Tube and turn around and monetize others work)

    In your example, you contacted the artist after two years of the tune being heard and possibly downloaded and used by third parties.

    Once the original artist found out (remember, you didn't contact them for two whole years) The artist or their reps may have let the site know that you didn't have permission to commercialize the song.

    I get that you don't believe anything was done wrong, but the time to contact the artist was before putting it up on You Tube or whatever the site was. That way a deal may have been able to be reached (or not), as creating a commercial song and posting it for the public is breaching the "not for commercial use" imho.

    Now, there's still a few things missing from your initial "let's just say."

    Respectfully, here are my questions:

    Why didn't you contact the artist for permission before putting it up on You tube or whatever other public site was used?

    Is the site in question Youtube? because most of the time people will post comments asking if they can use the song,
    while others will just use a downloader to get it anyway.

    Long story short, you've been getting accolades for over two years and someone may have gotten paid even if you didn't.
    It also sounds as if the vocalist didn't appreciate their creation being up for two years, thus breaching the original terms of use, regardless of your intent.

    I can understand that you may not have viewed it that way, but what if someone had taken your music, put another vocal on it, and then contacted you after two years of use, stating that there was an opportunity to submit for "TV, movies"

    Wouldn't you wonder if any money had been made during all that time, and go to the site in question to find out what gives?

    I hope this helps. I wish you all the best.

Posts 1 - 12 of 12

 ! You need to Log In or Register to post here.