Yeah, and even beyond hip-hop, all good art is based on previous art. I don't know why people act like it's different with music. great movie directors pay homage and use styles from the past, and tweak them, or recycle them. Writers use it for books, short stories, screenplays. Artists do it with paintings and drawings.
We don't consider a lot of this stuff to be stealing, yet when it's music/audio, people jump all aboard the stealing train.
FWIW I do think people are starting to appreciate sampling more and more.
Where we differ though is I see this as brehs applying a pretty liberal take to the old phrase "Good artist's steal".
When writers write short stories, books or screenplays they aren't literally take someone else's material and tweaking it.
When artists paint paintings they may all use similar techniques, have access to the same colors etc. but where
they differ is what they do with these materials.
In Music it's the same thing ! There's really no difference here.
IP is a real thing in all of these realms and if people feel you're infringing on their material you can't just say
"Oh well, I thought Frodo & the ring needed a new perspective" or "I thought it'd be cool to retell the story
with uncle ben staying alive and aunt may dying". Especially if you're trying to sell new works based on
these original works.
I mean hell Nintendo fiercely protects their IP's and will shut down FREE STUFF let alone fully purchasable titles.
You need PERMISSION and music works the SAME WAY.
Again, sampling is dope, but brehs are really downplaying WHY someone would have to or even want to
protect their art.
". Even if they're leaving the loops relatively untouched, the understanding of sequencing and progression is on another level.
