They would not exist
You would put some audio files in your sampler, tweak them and play them with MIDI or some PureData wizardry, until you are satisfied of the sound, exactly like today
China has copyright and IP laws…
China *does* have IP and copyright laws. They're just enforced differently than they are in America and most of the West. You just have to be on your game and declare ownership of your art before the copier does.
If you bothered to watch the video, you'd see how most of the cases would have flown in China since the original artist was the one taking the artist who sampled to court on their own terms. Lou Reed could have easily sued ATCQ if American laws were the same as China's for instance.>>9267
Is this why butthurt Americans are always claiming China is a "technology thief?"
Other artists often do make renditions of other songs but I think they need to credit the original artists and possibly have their permission to do it. Take for example the bluegrass Slipknot ripoff of the thrash song Psychosocial on Youtube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhXHINK7-o4
sampling never stopped being a thing?
>>9266>How would music sampling work under socialism, given that intellectual property laws wouldn't exist?
it would have no restrictions obviously?
you could've just made a thread on sampling without asking a cookie cutter "how would X be under socialism"
How IP would be handled under socialism seems like a very worthwhile question.
it wouldnt even exist
Sampling isn't music. It's stealing.
huh its almost like china needs to trade with capitalist countries too
Will Pet Shop Boys sue Drake now?
Why doesn't China abolish IP now that it's the global superpower and can make other countries conform to its system?
Also, free market libertarians will tell you IP goes against free market principles.
So Jay-Z didn't realize Egypt had copyright laws?
>>9273>Oh noes you can't steal technology!!!1! And how dare you accuse China of such.
Stealing knowledge is based, suppressing the spread of technology should be punishable by death.
Chinese freely create counterfeit goods and borrow designs, not that it's bad, but Id say they have ip and copyright laws so they can sue any westoid porkies who try to capitalise on any innovations they make.
They already have the lawsuit prepared.
Can we just agree using an unlicensed sample of someone else's work is a really shitty thing to do?
You say this, because you only know of cheap, lazy pop music samples. You are oblivious to how sampling is an art in and of itself.
Seems to me like this story is merely a case of good ol' music industry racism. White raver kids in Britain felt entitled to a drum break made by a Black artist and the Black artist didn't receive anything. Has nothing to do with "muh IP is sacred".
Pretty funny that most musicians hate IP while most illustrators have petit bourgeois brain worms and defend it to death.
>>9383>Pretty funny that most musicians hate IP
"Most musicians", unless you're talking about the cases in OP's video where older musicians were hitting rappers with million-dollar lawsuits for 15-second loops.
Fairly sure mainstream musicians are a minority by definition.
>>9382>sampling is an art guize see!>literally posts the most sophisticated example
Lemme guess, when your boomer grandfather told you he didn't think rap was real music you played him Good Kid MAAD City.
Now I'm reminded of all those Tumblr girls from 10 years ago who would complain how their original fashion/jewelry designs they sold on Etsy were stolen by Urban Outfitters or some other equally shitty company.
In all seriousness though, the culture among musicians is very different from the culture among visual artists. Musicians build off each other whereas visual artists like illustrators and fashion designers constantly have to be original.
Because most musicians are proles whereas most illustrators are petit-bourgeois.
Notice how it's usually the PB who goes hardest for defending property laws of all sorts. Every time riots break out the PB are the first to denounce them on the basis they're afraid of their little shops being looted.
>>9387>whereas visual artists like illustrators and fashion designers constantly have to be original.
Pretty much all famous fashion designers will tell you they seek inspiration from how people dress in the streets. They don't really seek "originality" but expressing their vision and their autism with materials and tailoring.
Doesn't surprise me but I'm specifically talking about Tumblr girls going apeshit because someone "stole" their design aka IP.
The contraction concerning IP is how you would protect small producers from larger more powerful ones.
That, and what if your music gets sampled by someone you hate? Would you be allowed to sue?
Sampler forced to public debate to justify their atrocity
Sampling and copying aren't theft because they both maintain the original.
Yet you probably think shitty punk that involves three chords and a frontman who can barely articulate is “music”.
Get out of here whitey.
This is actually a pretty tragic story when you look into it and I question whether or not the dude who made this video regrets his cavalier attitude 20 years later.
If you bothered watching the video I linked above you'd see how the host shows you exactly how to reproduce the technique.
I could literally remake the beat in VidRel in 15 minutes if I had an MPC (which BTW samples a bossa nova song from the 60s).
The reason most sampling these days is "lazy" is because record companies charge producers over $300,000 for a sample. The music industry is highly monopolized so they're able to get away with that. It's precisely the reason why you only see sampling in cheap pop songs made by "big names": they can afford it.
I hear a bit of a resemblance but you'll have to timestamp exactly where you think the sample starts.
Question: is cultural appropriation a form of IP or not?
Cultural appropriation only makes sense in the context of colonization.
So was Jay-Z stealing a track from an Egyptian artist a case of cultural approp? Last time I checked Blacks have never colonized Arabs and in fact the opposite is true.
I don't think so it just sounds like plagiarism.
“Cultural appropriation” is one of those “I-can’t-define-it-but-I-know-it-when-I-see-it” things.
For instance, vidrel isn’t CA because no colonial relationship exists between Black Americans and Egyptians (Egyptian Arabs actually enslaved Black Africans but that’s a whole other story).
So would, say, using Indian, Bulgarian, or Southern French folk music for drill beats be an example? What about all those instances of white rock stars covering songs by Black blues artists? It’s not a one-size-fits-all thing at all.
How do you define colonization?
cultural exchange has happened since ever, sometimes violently but most of the time not, but its evil now for some reason
Black girls should’ve trademarked cornrows before white women started wearing them down the fashion runway.
Kek, I'm old enough to remember when The Light and Didn't Cha Know were played all the time on MTV.
Globalization and social media have made cultural exchange the norm.
Go to Toronto where you'll see Indian-Somali-Russian fusion cuisine.
Sampling has been used in pop music from the earliest days dummy.
Who did the Beatles sampled?
most intellectually honest IP law defender
I like how the other guy is talking about a whole genre and you ask about a single band. Anyway, here you go https://www.whosampled.com/The-Beatles/samples/
They literally ripped off Black music.
I asked about them because for some reason I thought that they were considered the archetype of pop music.
If you check the list they are all "replayed samples":> An interpolation (also referred to as a replayed sample), as opposed to a direct sample, is when the sampling track does not use a portion of the actual source recording, but reproduces it in some way. In many cases interpolations reproduce the exact melody line of another track using a different instrument.
This is not actual sampling. In sampling you take an actual record from someone else. Copyright only protects actual records, not melodies.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation_(popular_music)> Interpolation is often used when the artist or label who owns the recording of the music declines to license the sample, or if licensing the piece of music is considered too costly.
>>9443>its not real sampling
It's not sampling at all.
I don't give a shit about how sampling works legally.
I could not care less about the the legal mechanisms of capitalist law.
I could not care less about the enforcement of "intellectual property".
I could not care less for the vultures whose only aim is to stifle creativity.
None of this matters to me because I want art to be free.
Then shut the fuck up. Nobody forces you to talk about shit that you don't care about. Just let those who are interested discuss it.
If you want to defend "intellectual" property on a communist imageboard then prepare to get called a retard, lmao.
All of this is horrible evil corporate greed masquerading as artist protection. Anti-sampling legislation has been universally dogshit for artists, apart from the artists who were already very wealthy.
I don't want to defend IP, I just wanted to point out that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. No investigation, no right to speak.
IP is “good” if Black people are the ones benefiting from it? Piss off.
>>9266>”ordered all copies of X album to be destroyed”
Not the Beatles but the Beach Boys sampled Chuck Berry. Surfin’ USA used one of Berry’s tracks.
It's not sampled, they wrote new lyrics to the song.
Define sampling then. Because that’s literally what nearly all hip hop producers do: take an existing instrumental and have the rapper lay new lyrics on top.
Here's Wikipedia, I think it's pretty easy to understand:> In sound and music, sampling is the reuse of a portion (or sample) of a sound recording in another recording.
They are reusing parts of already recorded music. That's what hip hop producers do, they cut out snippets from other music and put them together into something new.
> take an existing instrumental and have the rapper lay new lyrics on top.
That's how they do it with reggae riddims too, and nobody is calling that sampling. Sampling is a technique that hip hop producers frequently make use of while creating their "instrumentals". It's not when the rapper sings over it.
>>9457>No investigation, no right to speak.
This is flawed logic. It's like asking someone to defend communism under capitalism's terms.
copyright defenders look as silly as the cryptocoin morons who purchased nfts and got mad that everyone else could simply right-click their garbage monkeys, becomes doubly funny when its alleged leftists becoming pinochets strongest soldiers when it comes to copyright laws and the division between manual/intellectual and skilled/unskilled labor>>9463
lmfao why would anyone need to become a lawyer just to argue for the abolishing of property, which includes intellectual property. copyright isnt real bro
>>9469>That spongebob meme
they are stealing the likeness of an IP to defend how emulation (because emulators are totally stealing from an infinite source) is a crime and should be thrown in jail.
if they did not pay nickelodeon for that meme they also should go to jail.
Vanilla Ice singing the dings will never not be funny.
Still a selective sampling fallacy on your part.
Most sampling in pop music and yes even rap is horrid and amounts to stealing rather than muh art.
All I got from this is the Gaye family wanted those coins and took the opportunity to sue.
>>9472>it isn't art if the process isn't painful>muh theft
if sampling is theft then stealing is based
Would you say this to Sophie on tumblr circa 2014 who’s chomping out about Urban Outfitters stealing the designs she’s posted on Etsy?
>>9481>but what about muh little business
i dont fucking care lol
yes, sure it sucks for her but more people are getting to wear her design, you got to come up with something new or find a way to compete.
Even mainstream fashion designers get their stuff imitated by fast fashion retailers and they sure don't do anything about it. So?
I've already stated that the issue with shit sampling is 1. lazy producers who are turning out cheap junk because labels need to make a quick profit and 2. the enormous amount of money it now costs to clear a sample.
Since Dilla is "too sophisticated" for you how about Havoc's slowed-down piano samples as an example of mainstream sampling done right?>>9481
Sophie from Tumblr is probably white and already has a steady income if she's spending her time making things for Etsy. She requires the bourgeois state to enforce IP because she believes she's entitled to not have to work like the rest of us. I have no desire to defend her even if UO or Shein or whatever copies her designs.
preach, proletarianization should be seen as a "good" thing
Cultural appropriation has to do with colonialism and hegemony but in practice it becomes a soft form of IP/
>>9386>>literally posts the most sophisticated example
Which is exactly why you see thousands of lo-fi hip hop copycats in the underground.
So what about indigenous artists whose indigenous designs get copied and mass produced by settlers?
How are they protected without some form of IP?
This does happen and it happens a lot actually.
>>9502>How are they protected without some form of IP?
Yet IP laws are mostly weaponized against BIPOC, namely BLACK hip hop artists/producers.
Also, which "settler designers" are copying Native designs? Give examples and tell me if that justifies state repression of all art.
If sampling is that big a deal to some souls create a right of confrontation from the sampled towards the sampled.
Make it public.
No such thing.
If my ancestors arrived in America 150 how am I a settler?
I love how libshits can justify reactionary policies simply by placing “indigenous” or “queer” on them.
>>9531>if I ignore everyone else itt and repeat my liberal bullshit it'll become true
theft is good when it isnt wage theft
Prove sampling is music and not just laziness.
lol even bourgeois law doesnt give a fuck most of the time so not even gonna bother :)
This track uses AT LEAST five different samples, all layered on top of each other.
Nothing sophisticated about this. Anyone with a good ear and MPC could make this without an issue.
Again, your beef seems to be with lazy producers.
Make an argument that isn't based on emotions and aesthetics first?
Bronx drill is supposed to make your ears bleed.
It's just a technique used when creating music.
Making something old into something new requires talent.
In Canada, First Nations already have cultural protections.
How many rap producers get taught in music theory?
^ this uygha has moved the goalpost like 10 times already LMAO
It's already taught in music theory.
But it won't be long before the boomres who currently run the academy all die off and Gen Xers and Millennials who grew up with Golden Age hip hop start taking over.
He’s probably white and over 45.
It's hard to believe that in 2023 anyone would still die on the hill of "rap isn't music".
Sampling is music precisely because it's stealing.
They do, Click seems to be a term for metrognome and similar devices.
Weird choice for number one. I assumed it would have been Shook Ones pt2.
So this is not really a list of samples, but the way they are used? I expected it to show multiple uses of each sample.
He has other videos on his channel where he breaks down how each sample is used.
Most lo-fi hip hop is just drums placed on top of Tame Impala instrumentals.
First as tragedy, then as farce.
I already said right of confrontation for the OG producer. It's a social issue. Fix it socially.
Enforce it when we take power, and even better this is one of those issues where we can behave like we are already in power to a certain extent as long as we apply the rule evenly.
Serious, liberalism ie. the bourgeois dictatorship is crumbling enough a bit of termite work, and just seeping into the power vacuum through suction is possible here.
>>9603>Fix it socially.
Kind of buzzword-y but whatev.
You keep posting hip hop’s “Mozarts” when I keep telling you 99% of sampling in rap and pop music sounds like ass. Your average producer doesn’t make anything close to what you insist is “proof” sampling is an art form nor is your average producer getting academic books written about their signature sound or taught as music theory.
Now I’m certain *you* are white and probably have loads of white guilt.
That would be a fair point if I hadn't given a concrete proposal.
Let the OG producer yell in their face, simple as.
>>9271>responding to a stallman article to start dengism struggle session #43945893495 because you saw a piece of artwork from the 60s of a chinese man with a hammer when nobody before you even brought up china
Most people who learn to play the guitar don't become Jerry Garcia either.
Daily reminder hip hop is CIA.
Real revolutionaries listen to Beethoven.
I find it funny how when non-Western people play rock music, use electric guitars, rap and so on, nobody gives a shit, but when Westerners include foreign elements in their art, suddenly it's bad because it's "cultural appropriation".
Liberals bitching about "cultural appropriation" are doing nothing but upholding American cultural hegemony.>>9531>>9533>>9612>nor is your average producer getting academic books written about their signature sound or taught as music theory
Who cares? Music is only valid when academics write books about it now?
If it's so easy, get a copy of Ableton Live and start making dank beats, and post them here for us to enjoy, I'm sure you can do this in no time.
As a musician who can play different instruments and have played in front of an audience several times, I suck at sampling and respect it as an art form. You are just a wanker LARPing as Adorno.
This thread is embarrassing as fuck, really.
Also musique concrète is nothing but sampling, but I imagine Pierre Schaeffer, Pierre Henry and Luc Ferrari were lazy talentless hacks according to the bright academic mind of this thread.
Surely nobody in academia takes Stockhausen seriously since he sampled a boy voice in Gesang der Jünglinge and natonal hymns in Hymnen instead of creating "real music" all by himself.
>>9619>black art is CIA, uphold dead white elites instead!
Fuck off Maupin.
nah not the form but the content its been astroturfed so thoroughly that its practically synonymous now
I’m pretty sure most of the people on this board aren’t old enough to remember a time when MTV actually played music.
Care to post video examples so we can actually hear this music?
Th point still stands: China has IP laws so the notion “socialism is inherently anti-IP” doesn’t hold much water.
i love how "china has ip laws" doesnt make you question china but rather coming to the conclusion "ip is OK under socialism"
Maybe IP laws wouldn't be necessary if artists could live well by paying their dues to society working for a short while and still have a lot of time away from labour to craft their art, instead of trying to become a bunch of cringe rent-seekers in an era where it hasn't been ever easier to create and duplicate art.
Have you ever seen Rap of China? I'm sure they use a lot of Vengeance sample packs.
Private property with Chinese characteristics.
China hasn't been socialist since Mao shook hands with Nixon.
Well well well, speak of the devil.>29:39 – "in my house… my mother listened to classical music"
So we've cracked the code: listen to classical music if you want the creativity to make beats that are – dare I say – sophisticated.
And I further my assertion that the only reason >>9612
(you) have a grudge against sampling is because mainstream producers are phoning it in as much as the artists. Do you know the reason most mainstream music is garbage is largely due to how monopolized the industry is?
Hell, there are actual charts and graphs which show how the quality of popular music has declined since the 90s. Things like key changes, for instance, used to be a lot more frequent in pop songs decades ago but are barely existent today.
>Now I’m certain *you* are white and probably have loads of white guilt.
Well I'm Jewish so I'm white but not white-white.>>9624
To be quite honest, I get the impression that a lot of the "hip hop is CIA", "punk is CIA", "abstract and outsider art is CIA" allegations really boil down to respectability politics. Goons like Maupin and his LaRoucheite sugardaddies want to create a sense of hatred and distrust around art from below because they believe leftists need to be "respectable", as in we should look less like actual working-class outsiders and more like we're going to a board meeting. "Real communists wear suits and hate art made by people who are actually frustrated with the status quo", pathetic.
When the establishment does take over art from below it's always to ensure its deprived of its potentially radical edge. Remember, Jackson Pollack was a communist and the only reason he got money under the table from CIA-funded orgs was because the establishment thought it could use abstract art as a means of showing the USSR the US was culturally progressive.
I actually remember having this conversation with a Black woman boomer communist who told me the reason the culture vultures specifically target hip hop and the culture of the hood is because the hood is where the struggle is.
Forgot to mention, Nas sampled classical music.
>>9642> Things like key changes, for instance, used to be a lot more frequent in pop songs decades ago but are barely existent today.
Key changes don't make a song good necessarily.
Honestly computers killed music. It used to be music could only be made by musicians of some degree. So sampling and the death of music go hand in hand.
I don't think it's been covered here, but the most creative sampling involves using the most samples, but the more samples you use, the more people you have to pay. Speaking of uncreative sampling. It's rather pointless to pay for a sample and then turn around and make the sample unrecognizable.
Lol most of the most famous samplers are Boomers or Gen X practically boomers. You kids have all this attitude and nothing creative to show for it. Just rehashing what was done before you.
ok gramps, lets get you to bed
>>9644>Honestly computers killed music.
Oversimplified. And MPCs aren't "computers" per se.
>So sampling and the death of music go hand in hand.
Again, your issue isn't with sampling itself but from lazy sampling.
>ut the more samples you use, the more people you have to pay.
And I've been making that point this entire thread: the music industry is highly monopolized and is trying to prevent people from sampling by charging an exorbitantly high amount for each sample. That's why you rarely see sampling in hip hop anymore but have lazy producers making cheap, minimalist beats by looping three notes over and over.
>Speaking of uncreative sampling. It's rather pointless to pay for a sample and then turn around and make the sample unrecognizable.
False. Disguised samples are the best samples.
>>9648>Oversimplified. And MPCs aren't "computers" per se.
Anon, don't look up what the C stands for. Greatest mistake of my life.>>9648>Again, your issue isn't with sampling itself but from lazy sampling.
That comment wasn't for or against sampling. Sampling is a rather irrelevant topic nowadays. No popular music really uses samples anymore.
>False. Disguised samples are the best samples.
It's about the end product not the process. Go back and see how many of J Dillas songs are just straight forward loops/covers/references
Sampling started because Black youth in the Bronx couldn't afford instruments. So they relied on reusing old jazz and funk albums.
Nice classism and racism.
>>9649>Anon, don't look up what the C stands for. Greatest mistake of my life.
Ok I'm dumb. It doesn't stand for computer. But of course it's a computer. Sampling on a computer is not any different than an MPC. That's a myth. It's just more laborious because you can't use a mouse.
But forgetting even digital or sequencers. You can say it even started earlier with splicing tapes. People were already manufacturing performances even then.
Are you a musician? Or just an elitist in general?
Anyway, sampling not only leads to the discovery of new aspects of talent; in addition, clashing head-on with all social and legal conventions, it cannot fail to be a powerful cultural weapon in the service of a real class struggle. The cheapness of its products is the heavy artillery that breaks through all the Chinese walls of enjoyment. It is a real means of proletarian artistic education, the first step toward a musical communism.
Recording original music is no more expensive.
>>9644>it's only art when it takes great pains to make
You must be like those fashoids who still get mad at Duchamp a century later, lmao.
>>9660>You must be like those fashoids who still get mad at Duchamp a century later, lmao
>>9659>when white people do it they never get the scrutiny
I know – hope – you are baiting, but yes Herbie Hancock, Kate Bush, Ryuichi Sakamoto (RIP), Coil, and countless other 1980s artists used huge-ass expensive computers to playback and manipulate samples, the best-known model is the Fairlight CMI, but there were also different systems like the Synclavier and custom computers at IRCAM.
Then the means of playing back samples got cheaper (E-mu Emulator, Ensoniq Mirage) and they created a more intuitive interface for it (Linn 9000, E-mu SP1200, MPC), right in time for hip-hop and industrial music to emerge or something (muh dialectics).
Don't wanna derail the threat but there's a lot to say about this. Namely, how reactionaries always appeal to respectability when they know they're losing the argument or can't respond.
If Penny Pinkhair says "the nuclear family is oppressive and must be abolished" you can be sure Maupin, Midwestern Marx, and others in their ilk won't put forth an argument to refute her but will merely try to discredit her on the basis she's not "respectable", e.g. "she has pink hair, she's part of the PMC, she's vegan, she listens to distorted music and likes abstract art, she reads Nietzsche, she dresses like a crust punk, blah blah blah."
We also see this with the Palestine protests in the West. The pro-Israel crowd always attacks those protests on the basis of the protesters' lack of respectability rather than addressing what the protesters are actually protesting against (namely, genocide). You see plenty of news articles about how Palestine solidarity protesters were unruly, they were "attacking" pro-Israel demonstrators, they were spraying graffiti on Starbucks windows, etc.
And yeah I would say the same is true of the culture. Punk and hip hop are attacked because they're unpolished and "not real music" because they weren't created by bourgeois whites and originally didn't appeal to white bourgeois values. There's a lot more to say about that but this thread isn't the place.
In my opinion, samples wont need to be cleared. They would all be free for use.
User's Hitler particles level: 40%
Quantization will always be cheating. It's literally no different from autotune.
and autotune is bad because..?
There’s only “more” misogyny in punk spaces because punk is so feminist women in those spaces aren’t afraid to speak out against sexist men FYI.
You should see how much rape is going in squats or whatever theyre called in english
Sampling would be flat out banned under socialism, since the DoP would stress the creation of high art only. Sampling has degraded music to an enormous degree.
youre a retvrn faggot
Kelis did a whole interview about Nas beating her and he still didn't get cancelled.
Hot take that will get me cancelled, but the “no snitch” code is arguably why misogyny flourishes in both punk and rap subcultures. People don’t want to be known as the girl who outed a certain big name in the scene as an abuser. It took Justin Sane’s victims DECADES to expose him and there were at least twelve of them.
More proof of why anarchism is toxic and idealist.
you think no snitching is exclusively an anarchist thing? when communist orgs all over the world are well-known for covering up rape cases too?
"Cancel culture" is based on the false premise that immoral people shouldn't be making art for us. Which again, comes back to the debate over whether or not sampling has made music more generic: if all art did was reinforce the dominant moral paradigm it would cease to be innovative and would just be bloody boring. It would have no edge nor would it shake or move us.
Lauryn Hill is a known antisemite and homophobe, yet you would all kill to see her perform live, wouldn't you?
No, I've never even heard of them before.
Take that anarchist flag off.
Being a snitch, even if you're outing an abuser, is considered even worse than being a scab or a Zionist. Punk scenes are full of rapists and abusers because anarchists adhere to a "no snitch" code which causes a lot of abuse to fly under the radar. Not to mention, keeping "the scene" together is considered the most important thing (muh mutual aid and all that) so no survivor of abuse wants to be known as "the woman who destroyed the scene". And given how close these people are to each other there's no way any survivor who comes forward will remain anonymous for very long.
This is why anarchism doesn't work in practice. Anarchist spaces are all prone to extreme violence and abuse because survivors feel ashamed if they come forward. Why did it take Justin Sane's victims so long to tell their stories? Kristina Sarhadi stayed silent for 13 fucking years.
We just exposed Brian Baker from Minor Threat/Bad Religion as someone who forced his ex-gf into an abortion which turned her into a suicidal alcoholic.
Abuse is rampant in punk in a way it's not in hip hop or any other music scene.
Implying most people who identify with punk are even into politics much less anarchism in the first place.
Are you implying Minor Threat and Bad Religion weren't explicitly political bands?
The Sex Pistols were a boy band, Johnny Rotten is an insufferable liberal, Anarchy in the UK has basically nothing to do with the political philosophies of Anarchism.
We're talking about American punk, the DC scene in particular, which has always been extremely political.
Can you stop spamming this video in every thread?
The shitty sampling is part of what makes this particular genre unique though. Drill sampling sounds like ass for a specific effect. They choose certain pop songs to distort as an extra way of mocking the opps.
I don't think even the dumbest most dogmatic members of the ccp would say something that stupid.
Americans argue whether or not their policies are "capitalist" or "democratic" all the time, even they're not dumb enough to take it for granted that because they consider themselves to be a capitalist democracy that all of their policies are inline with their ideals.
>>9367>Why doesn't China abolish IP now that it's the global superpower and can make other countries conform to its system?
1. They've betrayed the revolution in part or in whole
2. They still don't think they're powerful enough, and/or there are bigger fish to fry
3. They think, while in principle it should be abolished, but that it would harm """the economy""" to much to do so at the present moment.
Or any combination of the above. My guess is a bit of all three, but mostly 2.
Talib Kweli posted Holocaust denial on Twitter.
Kodak Black raped an underage girl and never faced any penalties for it.
You have to be a pretty big piece of shit to get cancelled in hip hop.
So artists wouldn’t get paid royalties under socialism?
Why should they? They should get paid for their hourly labour.
Fame and fortune are terrible reasons to make art.
I don't see how fame is relevant to royalties. Barely relevant to socialism either.
Royalties are unequal compensation. Furthermore they encourage bad art and 'playing to the gallery'. IMO artists should be supported by standard wages so long as they are creating art which is over a minimum standard of popularity (relatively low). This would be measured by consumption figures on entertainment platforms. That way an artist can keep doing what inspires them and as long as they have a small but loyal fanbase they can keep working.
So basically, not much different from the golden age of rock. We know now that rock stars from the 70s were engaged in some incredibly sketchy behaviour. Underage groupies were a lot more common than people want to believe, for instance.
It's only a matter of time before all the legendary rappers and producers get exposed for all the debauchery they did behind closed doors.
Forgot to add, I still don't agree with cancel culture and find its entire premise to be based on a false idea. Justin Sane raped multiple women and is an overall piece of shit, agreed, but does that entail Anti-Flag's entire body of work needs to be memory hole'd? It's not a black-and-white issue.
Royalties are basically rent and rent is bourgeois.
I was perceiving that you meant fame and fortune were two different factors as regards to motivation, but now it seems that you were also considering fame as means to fortune.
I was saying that fame as an intrinsic desire, removed from it as an extrinsic good, is not very relevant to royalties.
I then implied that there aren't particularly strong reasons to believe that this extrinsic desire for fame wouldn't survive under socialism, or that it would even be massively curtailed.
My mistake for not getting what you meant.
I can see proposals replacing royalties that fulfill royalty's social function other than your own, but they all have their plusses and minuses, so your proposal still seems plausible.
>>9815>It's only a matter of time before all the legendary rappers and producers get exposed for all the debauchery they did behind closed doors.
Anyone who waits over 25 years to come forward is probably making shit up for clout FYI:
Her abortion doesn’t sound very forced.
Isn't this the drum beat from the Powerpuff Girls theme?
Why did Kanye get cancelled then?
Yes, and it's unfortunate that several contrarians in this thread would say otherwise and insist sampling is "lazy" and "ruinous".
I posted enough Dilla samples so here's one from Madlib and Doom.>>9856
At this point, Ye is more of a mogul than a rapper/producer. His fascism comments were the final straw in a long list of shit he's been doing for years.>>9791>>9826
Getting an abortion should be considered no morally different than getting a tooth removed. There is no fucking way the government should be allowed to tell me what I need to push out of my pussy. Now pearl-clutchers are trying to cancel Justin Timberlake for allegedly "forcing" Britney into aborting despite her admitting it was a decision both of them made and definitely not forced.
There is no socialism in China and hasn’t been since Mao sold China out to the West.
Now this is podracing
Intellectual property laws are currently historically necessary for the development of productive forces and continuation of the revolution which china is leading. China selectively enforces IP laws to further the interests of the proletariat. They break bourgeois nation's IP laws to develop productive forces.
yeah, that's part of what I meant by option 1.>>9863
And that's option 3.
Everything you listen to is clicked and pitch-corrected. Even singers who refuse to use autotune are pitch-corrected during mixing and mastering. You obviously have no clue how music production actually works.
Anyone got context on this?
>Uninteresting how you consume black culture yet turn around and support abortion when abortion disproportionately helps blacks
>>9863>Intellectual property laws are currently historically necessary for the development of productive forces and continuation of the revolution which china is leading.
The teleology here is off the charts.
No comment on the argument, just an aside that Marxism is teleological.
IP laws are a tool of the proletariat in china
“Marxism is teleological” is outdated nonsense.
Teleological means goal directed.
If Marxism isn't directed towards the goal of full communism then it isn't Marxism.
History doesn’t have a directed goal. It’s just class struggle. Read Althusser.
History may not, but ideologies can have goals
Ideologies are contingent on history. Socialism doesn’t “naturally” morph into communism. Why is China a capitalist hellhole now even though they’re arguably more developed than most parts of America?
A teleological proposition is not a fallacious one. Consider this teleological proposition, "We must eat so that we do not starve."
A non teleological explanation of the existence of China's IP laws is this: China's IP laws arose out of development in productive forces.
China's IP laws are historically necessary, as they came FROM development of productive forces and they EXIST to foster development of productive forces.
they exist because china is capitalist. its just that easy
This is what I’m saying.
>>9882>history doesn't have a goal. It just has several goals.
Yeah, it has several competing teloses. At least one of which is communism.>>9884
Literally none of that is relevant in the slightest. The other anon specified that he wasn't interested in the pro-china anti-china aspect of your argument.
>>9891>At least one of which is communism.
Communism isn’t inevitable and the past century should have proven this.
>>9893>Communism isn’t inevitable
Never said it was. I said history has several "competing" teloses… Them being a competition implies that some of them could lose.
Interesting how this interview took place a year before he got sick.
>>9894>I said history has several "competing" teloses…
100% invoking metaphysics.
How do you know history has a “final goal” at all?
>>9898>100% invoking metaphysics<the "my philosophy is super special and doesn't even have metaphysics" meme
It's not the 20th century anymore, please just give it the fuck up.>How do you know history has a “final goal” at all?
That isn't even the correct term, it's "final cause" which doesn't imply the same thing. I don't think that history is some magical spirit like Hegel did as you seem to imply. I think that people who make up history have different goals (teloses) and that therefore when considering history you have to use the concept of those goals (teloses) imparting their forces onto reality. I also think that teleological conceptions can be used in non-goal circumstances such as biological evolution and societal structures which fall under the same patterns, but I don't even need that here so w/e.
Teleology in biology is still controversial in science. But I am a partisan of the yes camp.https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleology-biology/
I fucking hate these Marxists that will believe any nonsense as long as you say the words "structural" or "dialectical" or "material" enough times before hand, but if you say anything the least bit against their intuition without saying their magic words they immediately accuse you of more or less believing in magic.
No, thinking "this group of people did X thing because they wanted Y result" (which is more or less what you objected to) does not mean that I believe in some mystical God of History.
History, like evolution, doesn’t have an “end goal”. It just is.
>>9900>History, like evolution, doesn’t have an “end goal”. It just is.
Entirely agreed… But
Telos doesn't even mean goal. It's broader than that. Goals are a type of telos. Teloses are a form of causation when something 'exists' or 'happens' or whatever to do something else or for the sake of something else.
"a bird has wings to fly" Or
"The government passed anti-union legislation to break labor" Or
"Potato cultivation became popular to to increase calories per acre"
The way “teleology” is applied almost always means an end goal at the end of a metaphysical process. So for instance people will argue that a seed is the same as a tree because a seed has a telos to become a tree.
What do you mean by this exactly? In the example that you posted I would not say that a seed has an "end goal" to become a tree, but apparently you would.>metaphysical process
Isn't every process metaphysical? What would possibly be a non-metaphysical process?>people will argue that a seed is the same as a tree because a seed has a telos to become a tree.
As would I, but with a lot of caveats. (Engels and Hegel both note something similar as well, with nearly that exact example)
'Sameness' doesn't describe a single relation between things, but there are multiple different relations of sameness. Like a tree and a seed might be the same species (which I do think is defined teleologically at least in part), but not the same individual. Or it might be the same individual, but not at the same time… Like I'm the same as me from 20 years ago according to some metrics/meanings, but not others. Like I wouldn't say that just because I'm the same person and I'm an adult that me from 20 years ago was an adult. You and me are likewise "the same" by some criteria (species) and not by others. See video embedded for a nice mathematical demonstration of the principle of sameness (according to some criteria) between non-same things (according to another criteria) making sense.
I think you're implying that saying that a seed is the same as a tree is incoherent, but saying that they can't be sounds like Buddhist dogmatism to me.
In particular I don't know how you maintain that a seed and a tree aren't in some way "the same" without throwing out the entire notion of a species, and I don't know how you can define a species without any reference to teleology.
I love how this thread went from:
>debating the merits of IP
>debating whether or not sampling is art vs laziness
>whether or not China is still socialist
>debating what teleology means
At least Naxalite white girl hip hop head is posting good music ITT.
How many people under 35 listen to hip hop and punk vs how many listen to Joan Baez and Paul Robeson?
Sorry bro but no one who will actually live to see socialism in America wants your CPUSA nostalgia.
Anyone who has played Kaiserreich syndies has had to listen to JOOOE HIILLLLLLLL by Baez a million times lol
Yeah but it’s not like loads of zoomers are listening to old Americana folk shit over rap and punk.
Would you consider reusing a known tune to be “stealing?” Like using the tune of John Brown’s Body for Solidarity Forever?
I saw this video a while ago and don’t know how I feel. On one hand fuck copyright but it’s not fair those guys got massively screwed over by the industry and received nothing.>>9403
Donuts is definitely a sophisticated album I doubt your average dudebro producer could make something like that.
Just accept China is deeply revisionist.>>9874
The Black birthrate in America actually increased post-Roe. If anything, abortion and birth control access kill white birthrates harder since white women have better access to both.>>9882
Althusser is the GOAT.>>9904
That's every leftypol thread with over 200 replies.>>9905>>9906>>9907
Maupin and co. erroneously believe if it wasn't for the CIA creating the "synthetic left" all working-class people in America would be tankies like him with heavy nostalgia for CPUSA circa 1935. I don't want to bash on CPUSA since they did some great things back in the day, but anyone who insists the American left needs to return to that is seriously deluded.
"Folk music is populist and celebrates the people, hip hop and punk are dirty and prioritize the particular over the universal" is a useless statement to make. All the old red diaper babies who remember when leftism in America was "populist" (although I'd question this premise) are all dying off. Gen Xers and Millennials are reaching sage age where we are now the ones taking control of the culture; most of us were listening to rap and punk and active in those scenes. Gen Z doesn't give a shit about 1930s American communist nostalgia at all since they have no direct connection to it like oral histories. If you want to fester revolution you have to appeal to the younger generations over the older ones, since the younger folks are going to be the ones actually making revolution. Appealing to boomers is worthless at this point.
Not to mention all the rebellion is coming from hip hop and punk. Most "Americana" folk musicians these days are either apolitical or reactionary, meaning Maupin appealing to that genre as "populist socialist music" means he sees "class struggle" as primarily a cultural thing.>>9908
Funny enough, most Wobbly songs were based on Christian hymns that comrades took and subverted by turning the lyrics anti-clerical and anti-capitalist.>>9909
Someone got pleb filtered.
>>9913>Most "Americana" folk musicians these days are either apolitical or reactionary, meaning Maupin appealing to that genre as "populist socialist music" means he sees "class struggle" as primarily a cultural thing.
Yeah most white guys with acoustic guitars are reactionary. They only ever sing about how much they hate women who dumped or ignored them.
Regardless, it says a lot that Maupin and his goons would insist on pandering to the most reactionary wing of the working-class and doing so in an entirely cultural fashion. Because he doesn't actually have a Marxist understanding of class struggle. He sees it entirely as a war of identity groups, which is exactly why he promotes the notion pink-haired grad students somehow "oppress" white Protestant truck drivers.
In what world do IP laws help the working class?
Rap and punk don’t build productive forces, silly. Appalachian folk music however does. Because all socialism means is you work your ass off for the state instead of porky.
Fetishization of "the grind" but give it Soviet aesthetics.
Read the thread. Those are not samples, but "Interpolation (Replayed Sample)". "Intellectual Property" laws only protect actual recordings. If you re-record a melody or something, the original author does not have any claims over it. If you take a snippet from an actual recording and reuse it (this is what is usually called sampling), then the original author has a claim over it because you used their recording.
This is the same excuse Juice WRLD used when he got sued by Sting.
"It's not a sample it's an INTERPOLATION."
>>9913>Not to mention all the rebellion is coming from hip hop and punk.
Oliver Anthony doesn't exist?
How many of Oliver Anthony’s fans are under 35 vs how many are older Gen Xers and boomers?
Don't forget Dr. Dre beating the shit out of a female reporter. Also Tupac raped a woman and his leftist fans don't care.
Who gives a shit about what China does? Since when is Xi the "pope" of socialism?
I know you're being sarcastic, but Appalachian folk music doesn't channel the frustrations of millennials and zoomers the way rap and punk do. Trying to prop up "Middle American" culture as the "authentic working-class culture" in America is a failed project from the start.
PatSocs like Maupin seem far more interested in reaching out to angry boomers than they do building a basis among the younger folks who will actually live to see and build socialism. Claiming everything that happened within (potentially) radical circles on the American left post-1965 is "CIA" is a moot point. You play with the cards you've been dealt rather than romanticize what "should have" happened in the past.>>9924
Oliver Anthony is a meme/niche artist at best whose 15 minutes of fame are already over. >>9927
Correct. The Matt Walsh/Ben Shapiro crowd appeals to the same people Maupin does.>>9930
Pac was literally a CPUSA member but whatevs.>>9936
The argument I hear the most often is that socialism anywhere today will "inevitably" be a continuation of what the revisionist CPC is doing. Which again, begs the question.
It’s also because rap and punk were created by social outsiders while Americana folk music was created by white guys who are far more representative of the American public as a whole. At least it was but white Protestants aren’t going to be the majority in 20 years when Hispanics outbreed everyone.
Anyone publicly praising Hitler would get cancelled.
People praise George W. Bush and Bibi Netanyahu and don't get cancelled.
So it's just nationalism and white supremacy. Figures. Populism will always have a highly exclusionary element to it (be it antisemitism, anti-Blackness, hatred of immigrants, queerphobia, etc.) because it riles up the masses to fear and hate outsiders as "disrupters".>>9953
There is no such thing as a "forced abortion". Unless a fascist government is holding down a pregnant woman and cutting the fetus out of her the abortion isn't forced. YOU make the decision to walk into that clinic. Enough of this anti-woman garbage.
GWB and Bibi still have loads of supporters, unfortunately.
Am I the only one who finds it off “leftists” are defending producers ITT when producers are the biggest porkies in the music industry next to label higher-ups? Producers have been incredibly scummy.
Isn't the producer just the guy who puts together the backing track?
Show me an example of a producer exploiting an artist.
Okay now chop and screw remix this.
It's different with sampling because sampling doesn't so much copy the original as it does distort the original. That's why the original artist will sue rappers if they sample their track in unethical ways like turning a song about sunshine and rainbows into a song about killing opps.
Holy shit don’t tell me you forgot what R. Kelly did to Aaliyah when she was fucking 15 YEARS OLD.
Only big-name producers are porkies.>>9973>>9975>>9990>>9991
Most of these were clearly cases of power imbalances.
That's culture jamming and based. And yes I would say the same if it's the other way round.
There's also an art to irony. The reason why drill rappers and others sample upbeat songs, flip them, and turn them into beats for songs with dark subject matter has everything to do with being ironic.
Those were issues of older men preying on teen girls.
Dr. Luke abusing Kesha
Anyone sampling without permission like the people mentioned in OP’s video.
Nothing exploitative about that. There are plenty of posts on this thread demonstrating how repressive copyright and IP laws are.
Poetic justice Spector got clout martyred by Covid-Chan.
Can anyone explain why copyright and IP are wrong and won't be upheld under socialism?
Copyright and ip law are historically necessary, therefore they are allowed in socialism. See china: >>9863
It's non-labour income and inherently exploitative. Plus it creates barriers for others. You can't "own" an idea.
Patents have actually killed people by greatly increasing the price of necessary medications.
We are talking in relation to music. The communist nation of China must protect its art and music from the bourgeoisie and imperialists. IP and copyright laws are necessary for this.
Abolition of IP and patent law is petty-bourgeois anarcho capitalist policy, not socialist policy
>>10034>The communist nation of China must protect its art and music from the bourgeoisie and imperialists.
Theoretically speaking, how would getting rid of IP hurt Chinese culture?
The chinese music proletariat would cease to own their music, which currently they sell to the communist state owned and state subordinate record labels.
Without ip and copyright law, the music proletariat would own no music to sell and cultural production would halt. The development of the musical forces of China would be stifled under such proposed petty bourgeois anarcho-capitalist policy
You're literally using buzzwords.
Not an arguement.
The chinese cultural proletariat would starve and the chinese nation's cultural development would cease without the current communist ip law.
>>10039>The chinese cultural proletariat would starve and the chinese nation's cultural development would cease without the current communist ip law.
The chinese bookwriting and art and song making proletariat (THE CULTURAL PROLETARIAT) would have no way to recieve value for their creations without selling them to state and state subordinate entities (WOULD STARVE.) if they could not sell their creations in the form of intellectual property.
Sounds like capitalism with extra steps.
Does China have exploitative record labels too?
What is the alternative
Communism cannot exist without development of productive forces.
China is already heavily developed.
In historical totality, not really
How developed do the productive forces have to be before we can do communism?
Enough for the forces of production to exceed the relations of production, which has not happened yet. The Chinese Party will give analysis and policy when this becomes necessary
This, my friends, is a perfect example of why modern Marxism is a scam.
Xi and the CPC will issue a new policy (land policy, IP, foreign relations, whatever). This policy gets translated and passed around to all communist groups in the world. So now you have little normie Marxist, let's call her comrade Becky. Becky has to interpret the CPC's policy within the past 180 years of Marxist thought, so how is she supposed to do that? Well, she isn't. She takes this to one of her party's higher-ups, comrade Todd and asks him to give his interpretation of this policy. But comrade Todd is a little bit too much of a China fanboy for her taste, so she takes her questions about China's policy to her grad school advisor Prof. Steinberg who's an old school Maoist and not afraid to be harshly critical towards anything he sees as too far right or left. He tells her China hasn't been socialist since Mao shook hands with Nixon and tells her the new CPC policy is all garbage and she shouldn't bother with it.
See the problem here?
You could ask five different Marxists a very simple question like: "When did the USSR stop being socialist?" and get 27 different answers. And these comrades all claim to adhere to the exact same methodology (DiaMat) which they claim is foolproof. I'm sorry, but if this is the case then it proves Marxism can't overcome what it claims to overcome and what it frequently attacks anarchists for believing.
It's a total bluff and you're better off being anarchists since we don't have these problems.
Again Xi and the CPC aren’t the “pope” of Marxism and no one is obligated to follow China’s line on everything or even assume China is being 100% loyal to the ML line.
Did Justin force-feed her those pills? No. From the sound of what she wrote in her memoirs she and Justin mutually agreed to this. Not forced. Justin even comforted her by playing guitar while she was in pain.
Noooooo somebody think of the FETUSES!!!!
>>10055>replying 19 times<only to say modern marxism is a scam because there are disagreeing people and groups which call themselves marxists<also fuck jewish professors even though literally nobody mentioned a single academic amirite
The convo is a shitshow and an embarrassment, but your post if anything is even dumber than theirs
You can’t call DiaMat foolproof if it’s adherents can’t even come to conclusions on the most basic questions regarding socialism.
And yes, many old school Maoists in America are Jewish red diaper babies whose parents were Fosterites back in CPUSA.
>>10051>Enough for the forces of production to exceed the relations of production
If you actually understood what you said you would know that this is entirely begging the question. You effectively said that the forces of production have to be high enough for the revolution to occur… No shit sherlock, the question is where is this supposed point?>>10048
Marx, Engels and Lenin all thought that the productive forces were enough in the core capitalist countries to achieve communism in the 1880s. China is infinitely more developed than those were. When Mao himself was presented with the Shanghai People's Commune in 1967 he did not say "no muh productive forces :(((" he said>if the whole of China sets up people communes, should the People's Republic of China change its name to the People's Commune of China? Would others recognize us? Maybe the Soviet Union would not recognize us whereas Britain and France would. And what would we do about our ambassadors in various countries?>[the communes are] weak when it comes to suppressing counterrevolution. People have come and complained to me that when the Bureau of Public security arrest people, they go in the front door and out the back.
The actual argument isn't that it "can't exist" but that it would be (either through military or other means) be squashed out by the capitalist powers (external or internal) if attempted now. Or if the cpc could take up neoliberal (neoliberal not being used as a slur here, this is literally Hayek's argument against communism more or less) arguments that we currently don't have the organizational skills to manage communism, but as far as I know the cpc has never argued this.
I'm not even a Marxist, but I know enough to know that those are poor rebuttals.>can’t call DiaMat foolproof
They don't. they say it's a scientific method or something similar ("immortal science" blah blah blah).
As to a scientific principle or theory not being good if it "can’t even come to conclusions on the most basic questions", most climate change deniers believe in the standard model of physics, so I guess that the standard model of physics must be terrible.
Obviously there's something to the criticism of DiaMat seemingly being useless, but it's much weaker than you're making it out to be. No one is dumb enough to claim that the methodology is sufficient to achieve the truth, at most they claim it's necessary, at the least they claim it's useful.
Who said Marxism needs to be centralized? Comintern doesn’t exist anymore, sweetie.
Western sources and their baseless slander needs not to be acknowledged. >>10074
China has already pushed the socialism button. the Chinese proletariat is already overthrowing global capitalism and monopoly capital merely by exploiting the inherent contradictions with the chinese socialist mode of production.>Marx, Engels and Lenin all thought that the productive forces were enough in the core capitalist countries to achieve communism in the 1880s. China is infinitely more
What they supposedly believed is irrelevant to actual historical and existing material conditions >The actual argument isn't that it "can't exist" but that it would be (either through military or other means) be squashed out
Tautology. Not an arguement.>>10055
Not an arguement
Chinese intellectual property laws are socialist. The development and security of Chinese proletariat culture must be upheld.
Are you joking?
I genuinely can't tell.
Diddy was always a jackass NGL.
>>10055>so she takes her questions about China's policy to her grad school advisor Prof. Steinberg who's an old school Maoist and not afraid to be harshly critical towards anything he sees as too far right or left. He tells her China hasn't been socialist since Mao shook hands with Nixon and tells her the new CPC policy is all garbage and she shouldn't bother with it.
This prof is unironically correct. Modern China is deeply revisionist and I would question anyone who props it up as a shining example of "socialism".
>You could ask five different Marxists a very simple question like: "When did the USSR stop being socialist?" and get 27 different answers.>"blah blah blah why doesn't debate end???"
Because it's not supposed to. Marxism is a living ideology. It's not something where you put in the evidence and get an answer spit out. Marxism fundamentally understands everything as a process.
Marxism is very Jewish, in the sense that it arrives at truth the same way Jews do. What happens when one person says China is socialist and the other person says it isn't? You debate. You don't give up on the search for truth because one comrade says X and the other one says Y.
Your entire post screams cope.
You are the one coping. I am merely explaining how chinese intellectual property laws are historically necessary for the development and security of chinese proletariat culture.
You've explained nothing and you seem like you care more about Chinese nationalism than socialism.
Still you cope. You've made no arguement. Chinese intellectual property laws are socialist
You haven't demonstrated shit. YOU have to prove China is socialist and every policy it holds is in-line with socialism (as if the CPC isn't full of capitalist roaders).
I don't have to prove anything. Open your eyes, dumbass. The Chinese Communist Party is the most advanced and powerful communist organization of history.
what do you exactly get out of being unfunny for +100 posts on the deadest board of a niche imageboard
>>10093>The Chinese Communist Party is the most advanced and powerful communist organization of history.
We get to understand how chinese intellectual property laws are in fact socialist and historically necessary under these conditions.
But you aren't proving that. You're using conjecture and buzzwords.
I don't think that they're serious, they're just trolling and/or joking around.
They sound like they're from Infrared. The tone of their posts sounds identical to Haz or Haz's cult members.
I am sorry. I understand how you may feel this way. You fail to understand the truth, but I am not the most qualified to explain these complicated things.
Please read this theory to understand the truth. The marxists which I reference are much more qualified to speak on this issue than anyone here. The first one is mandatory reading material to understand the issue.
To Protect Intellectual Property Is to Protect Innovation
By CPC Leadership Group of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Source: English Edition of Qiushi Journal Updated: 2021-04-30http://en.qstheory.cn/2021-04/30/c_617535.htm
Xi stresses strengthening intellectual property rights protectionhttp://en.qstheory.cn/2020-12/02/c_568258.htm
Intellectual property protection continuously strengthened in Chinahttp://en.qstheory.cn/2021-03/18/c_604458.htm
China wholeheartedly upholds intellectual property causehttp://en.qstheory.cn/2020-12/17/c_575471.htm
I read through these, and the arguments used are entirely in the logic of capitalism. How is China an "alternative" to the global system, again?
There's new evidence he got Pac and Biggie killed as well.
All of these are about technology patents. What Naxalite and the others ITT are asking about is shit like IP in music and the arts, which none of these articles address.
Okay so now comrade Becky is going to have to interpret all these within the past 180 years of Marxist thought.
Almost everyone nowadays learns Marxism from college professors.
More like 40 years ago. People are unironically more likely to have learned Marxism from Youtube than professors nowadays.
Not unless Prof Steinberg can whip some decent theory into her….
Well yeah, for every 1 good song you can find 20 that are derivative and bad, that's just the nature of art.
>>10120>IP is good because it sometimes allows for non-democratic censorship
[Reddit CEO name here], I refuse to use your site. In the rare occasion I use a search engine, I use ublock origin to block search engine results from your site, and the UI design is so naive / actively hostile to the user I have to actively think about where to put my eyes to read what does not deserve to be read in the first place.
The principal of Intellectual Property Rights Being A Vehicle of Development holds in both cultural and actual production. The Chinese culture is the most socially healthy and developed of cultures, this is due to the Party's communist policies and the prosperous material conditions fostered by the Proletariat and it's Party.
Humanity's most advanced technologies and cultural fruits are being produced in China and are being accumulated into the People's hands through the Party by its scientific communist policies.
Please read this. Cultural development is a passing mention, but the Chinese ccommunists understand that advancements in science and technology are a prerequisite for greater innovation in cultural development. Under extant material conditions, intellectual property laws foster development in cultural production just as they do in science and technology production.
“Guidelines for Building a Powerful Country with Intellectual Property Rights (2021-2035)”https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2021/9/22/art_53_170293.html>>10105
This is not hasbara, it is material fact. This is the Chinese Communist Party's official statements and theories on the topic. The Chinese have conducted decades of the most in-depth and scientific class based analysis on these issues. Who are you to slander the Chinese communists' analysis and policies? They are the most scientific, communist, and powerful party of history.
Why is this just happening now in 2021 when China has become fully embedded with capitalism?
>>9913>Althusser is the GOAT.
Except no Marxist today believes a word he wrote.
>>9913>"Folk music is populist and celebrates the people, hip hop and punk are dirty and prioritize the particular over the universal" is a useless statement to make. All the old red diaper babies who remember when leftism in America was "populist" (although I'd question this premise) are all dying off. Gen Xers and Millennials are reaching sage age where we are now the ones taking control of the culture; most of us were listening to rap and punk and active in those scenes. Gen Z doesn't give a shit about 1930s American communist nostalgia at all since they have no direct connection to it like oral histories.
You misunderstand the argument. Hip hop and punk are massively commercial and can in no way be called organic expressions of working class hardship. Folk music like what Oliver Anthony is doing has almost no commercial backing so you know everything coming from that genre is authentic and actually speaks for working people. Rap promotes fucking bitches, shooting people and self indulgence. Punk romanticizes being a social degenerate. Real working people hate all that. I’d rather celebrate music made by working people for working people.
So how do Marxists determine what’s true and what isn’t?
Rap and punk are both made for working people by working people.
Sounds awful but I find it interesting how rock stars and pop stars force their girlfriends to get abortions whereas rappers prefer to have a bunch of kids out-of-wedlock.
You can filter out oppressive ideologies in pop music without resorting to propping up IP laws.>>10127
You still need to demonstrate the CPC's policies are entirely in-line with ML rather than being a degenerated workers' state littered with capitalist roaders.
>Under extant material conditions, intellectual property laws foster development in cultural production just as they do in science and technology production.
You're not showing evidence. You're regurgitating buzzwords and buzzphrases ("China is communist and China's IP laws will foster unlimited progress because China is communist").>>10131>Hip hop and punk are massively commercial and can in no way be called organic expressions of working class hardship
So every rap and punk song from now on is anti-proletariat because both genres have been heavily taken over by the mainstream music industry?
>Folk music like what Oliver Anthony is doing has almost no commercial backing so you know everything coming from that genre is authentic and actually speaks for working people.
Oliver Anthony only became famous because he was propped up by Matt Walsh, a POS who advocates Palestinian genocide and committing violence against LGBTQ people. Not the kind of person I would want "speaking for the working-class". And Oliver Anthony's 15 minutes of fame ended a while ago.
>Rap promotes fucking bitches, shooting people and self indulgence. Punk romanticizes being a social degenerate. Real working people hate all that.
And yet those genres in particular are overwhelmingly loved by most people under 40, in other words the people who will be the ones who actually implement socialism. Zoomers don't listen to Pete Seeger (no hate to Pete).
Interestingly enough, one of the most famous rap songs of all time is a subtle critique of capitalism.>>10132
Why are you even asking this? The truth is found in the debate.>>10134>I find it interesting how rock stars and pop stars force their girlfriends to get abortions
Unless someone is ripping open your womb, there is no such thing as a "forced abortion". YOU made the decision to walk into the clinic or take the pills.
It has already been demonstrated. Read more Party literature. China uses marxist leninist policy to protect the development of socialist chinese society.
You haven't demonstrated this. You're just taking the CPC at their word. You're telling, not showing.
For concrete demonstration of china's upmost degree of marxism leninism, see china today.
China today is the most prosperous socialist society in history, and this is due to Socialism With Chinese Characteristics - NOT CAPITALISM - and their strictly marxist leninist program which uplifts the People. I am not taking anyone's word for anything, because this is all readily observable and obvious fact.
Chinese society as it exists is only possible due to the hardliners marxist leninist governance.
The advancement of intellectual property rights precipitates the development in productive forces which marxist leninist governed communist chinese society stands upon.
>>10141>China today is the most prosperous socialist society in history, and this is due to Socialism With Chinese Characteristics - NOT CAPITALISM - and their strictly marxist leninist program which uplifts the People. I am not taking anyone's word for anything, because this is all readily observable and obvious fact.
Prove modern China is socialist.
The proletariat is the ruling class
>>10138>Unless someone is ripping open your womb, there is no such thing as a "forced abortion". YOU made the decision to walk into the clinic or take the pills.
By that logic there's no such thing as pressuring someone into sex unless it comes with physical force and/or threats.
I don't know about the Brittany stuff, and I don't think that just because coerced abortions are possible that abortions should be illegal (anymore that because coerced sex is possible that sex should be illegal), but I have no idea how you'd justify setting the standard for coercion so high.
Are you sure? Are China's billionaires "proletarian"?>>10144
If you made the decision with your partner to get an abortion it wasn't forced. Unless you're being dragged into the clinic kicking and screaming I don't see how the abortion is "coerced".
With how many times this guy’s videos have been posted here, couple with the longevity of this thread, you can be sure he’s eating breakfast, lunch, dinner, AND dessert.
>>10146>Unless you're being dragged into the clinic kicking and screaming
What if your employer demands it or he'll fire you?
The Proletariat is the ruling class of China. This is fact. The Proletariat has all political power in China. The Chinese Proletariat flourishes while the bourgeoisie exist only to serve the Proletariat. The bourgeoisie face immense suffering and oppression from the Party. Bourgeois pigs must uphold the interests of the Proletariat or face liquidation. The Chinese billionaires exist only in the interest of the Proletariat. The Chinese bourgeoisie especially and even the international bourgeoisie must uphold the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, further Proletariat interest, and be revolutionary in function. The bourgeoisie are a loyal tool of the Proletariat, all thanks to the Chinese People and the Party.
You do realize there are workplace protections regarding pregnancy, right?
Riot folk isn’t real music.
Utter nonsense. Employers need only to make up a reason. They can easily state in their bourgeois courts that the pregnant female was not fired because they were pregnant, but to manage costs, etc. This problem is solved in socialist courts, like the Chinese have established.>>10146<If you made the decision with your partner to get an abortion it wasn't forced. Unless you're being dragged into the clinic kicking and screaming I don't see how the abortion is "coerced".
Abortion is the result of coercive and oppressive bourgeois conditions; thereby, abortion is coercive. Proletarians as a class are forced by condition and interest to abort their children or fall deeper into pauperism by the bourgeoisie.
You would agree if you understood class dynamics. Class dynamics permeate through all things, yet they still elude you in every aspect. 👏
Someone who criticizes China for "not being socialist" and other such nonsense would fail to understand these facts, of course.
This thread shows how the most zealous "Marxists" online don't have any idea of what they are talking about.
Does anyone here believe zoomers give a shit about intellectual property when mass video streaming and FL Studio exist?
Have any of you ever heard of Vengeance sample packs?
How do you think producers make beats? Do you believe they painstakingly sample an original TR808 and process it with the right amount of compression, EQ and distortion every time to create their own bank of drum samples, or do you hope every single zoomer is a perfect law-abiding citizen paying for trap sample packs?
Some of y'all shouldn't waste time LARPing as boomers, your preconceived idea of what sampling should be is absolutely irrelevant to the zoomers who are practicing
the art of sampling in their bedrooms, in this very moment.
China has abortion on demand up to the moment of birth…
Can you sample an abortion?
I would love to sample the sound of the vacuum as it’s ripping out a fetus, yes.
“China had IP, therefore IP is necessary.”
What kind of microphone would you use? Omnidirectional or cardioid?
You don't want to capture the sounds of the whole room, only the vacuum sound?
I suggest to rather use a nicely placed XY or MS configuration to capture the stereo image well then.
>>10165>tooth whitening is the result of coercive and oppressive bourgeois conditions; thereby, tooth whitening is coercive. Proletarians as a class are forced by condition and interest to whiten their teeth or fall deeper into pauperism by the bourgeoisie because whiter teeth result in better jobs
Do you know how pathetic you sound?
Also, I love how you completely ignore the subject of reproductive labour and the fact women, when unable to control our own bodies, often take the dual roles of mothers and workers outside the home. People with penises get the privilege of having much more leisure time.
Capitalism runs on women's uncompensated ability to pump out and raise more wage slaves.>>10169
People forget the nuclear family isn't dying because "people can't afford it" but because younger people just don't want it. Your average 25-year old is more likely to be queer and polyamorous than they are to be heterosexually married.>>10170
This is exactly why the PatSoc (or "socialism is conservative") view is utterly moronic. Why are they so fixated on reviving relics from capitalism (IP laws, the nuclear family, patriotism, "authentic middle American culture") when the younger generations have largely rejected those institutions/traditions? The internet has made IP laws impossible to enforce and it's no surprise then that everyone in the music biz is being sued for unlicensed sampling nowadays. Not to mention, as I've said a billion times in this thread, record companies are charging an arm and a leg for sample clearance, so it's no surprise that the serious artists just say "fuck it" and sample anyway.
But yeah, IP laws have to exist in socialism because China has them, even though they're tremendously unpopular with the generations that will actually be the ones building socialism.
Why do socialist China and socialist Vietnam have such high abortion rates?
Sampling an abortion vacuum sounds utterly based.
>>9860>>9913>>9955>>10060>>10138>>10179>>10181>maoist supports killing babies
Can't say I'm surprised.
This song sounds familiar. Where have I heard it before?
Unfortunately for me the insane china guy is right that just because there are laws against it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
I don't understand why you feel the need to say that there's absolutely no abuse to a practice to defend it, when it's basically impossible to think of a practice that isn't sometimes abused or used in abuse.
because abortion is in the interests of the proletariat, as already stated.<Proletarians as a class are forced by condition and interest to abort their children or fall deeper into pauperism by the bourgeoisie.
How is abortion not coercive in China?
Doesn't matter. Sampling still isn't music. It's lazy and has lead to the degeneration of music overall. It has also made artists more disposable. The only people who benefit from it are producers who are the biggest porkies in the music industry next to label higher ups.
What makes abortion any more coercive than a woman who feels compelled to dye her hair blonde or someone to whiten their teeth in order to look more "presentable" at work?
Why is abortion a moral issue but not the others?
I've already answered your ass a million times so I'm going to let you go.
The interests of the proletariat are coercively upheld in the Chinese dictatorship of the proletariat.
You really love those buzzwords don't you?
The term "socialism" is reduced to a buzzword when you propose that China and Chinese intellectual property law is not socialist.
Arguments against the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese intellectual property laws are based upon buzzwords, not material analysis.
You haven't provided any real materialist analysis when it comes to class structure in China.
TBH we need to make this thread about music sampling again.
>>10179>Your average 25-year old is more likely to be queer and polyamorous than they are to be heterosexually married
The studies seem to say it's pretty close, but the age ranges aren't exact enough to say for sure, they seem to suggest marriage is a bit more popular still among that age group.https://www.bgsu.edu/ncfmr/resources/data/family-profiles/brown-manning-relationship-status-trends-age-gender-fp-21-25.htmlhttps://www.statista.com/statistics/719685/american-adults-who-identify-as-homosexual-bisexual-transgender-by-generation/
in any case this is a bit of a red herring to>People forget the nuclear family isn't dying because "people can't afford it"
There are a lot of people who want a nuclear family (including lgbt people, though idk how it works with the polyamorous). It's also unclear to what extent that difficulties in achieving the nuclear (or similar types… not exactly sure what counts as "nuclear" for the purposes of this discussion) are due to direct economic factors or if they're more related to the general isolation of society for instance. It should also be stated that some of what is replacing marriage is committed and monogamous cohabitations which are not married, with which there often isn't much of a difference as to the relationship.
I gave up on finding any studies of this (I could only find relevant information from a pro-marriage Mormon group, which I don't trust enough to cite) though, so for now that's all just a guess.
It's still the case that the nuclear family is no longer the norm, and that's why it makes zero sense for PatSocs and other reactionaries to prop it up or insist it's existence will be "necessary" under socialism.
Trying to appeal to white-picket-fence values is worthless at this point.
People in the past were heterosexual and monogamous because that's what was accepted.
Now that queerness and non-monogamy are way more accepted today than they were 20 years ago people are drifting away from marriage.
Those are moral issues, but obviously neither dying hair or whitening teeth should be banned. Abortion is a /more major/ issue because people have beliefs (no matter how stupid we think they are) about how "their baby was killed" which makes it a more serious issue.
There's also the fact it can be dangerous but I know in all or almost all circumstances taking the fetus to term is more dangerous, so w/e.
A good comparison I would say would be hijabs or burkas
Do I think that they're stupid as anything but a piece of fashion? Yes, as I have no belief in Islam or Christianity.
Nonetheless forcing people to not wear one is more pressingly offensive than forcing someone to dye their hair because through these subjectively stupidities it objectively causes more distress and is more against the will of the people.
Are you a man or woman?
I ask, because you seem to have a very paternalistic understanding of women's issues.
If public opinion makes an issue more pressing how do you explain the fact abortion rights have won in every state that's had abortion related referendums post-Dobbs? Obviously Americans are pro-abortion.
>>10198>There's also the fact it can be dangerous
Dental work can also be dangerous.
Broadly agreed. I just want to caution against being anti-monogamy, anti-nuclear etc. I believe we are for the freedom of consent, and while there are policies and attitudes that we hold which may threaten some nuclear families (no fault divorce, illegalization of marital rape, and the elimination of economic necessity) that in broad strokes, if a nuclear or stereotypically white-picket-fence family is able to maintain itself through the consent of its members it should have nothing to fear from us.
You are correct, though I don't know how what I said was paternalistic.>>10200
I wasn't talking about public opinion I was talking about the opinion of the women in question… I guess "will of the people" should have been "will of the person" to make that clear, sorry.
I'm unquestioningly pro-abortion I don't believe there is a single restriction on it I support.
>>10202>if a nuclear or stereotypically white-picket-fence family is able to maintain itself through the consent of its members it should have nothing to fear from us.
But that's not what I was arguing. I was saying appealing to "the [nuclear] family" or insisting the 1950s suburban American family should be revived under socialism is a worthless endeavor, as worthless as trying to revive Depression-era folk music as the main aspect of proletarian American culture. Zoomers don't want it, millennials don't care for it, let it die.
I'm saying that you can appeal to the right to have a nuclear family (which some of our policies would allow for) without appealing to forcing people into the nuclear family. I don't see any reason why we should have a stance on whether or not the nuclear family will die out or revive under socialism. If people find they want a nuclear family under socialism and it revives, that's fine, if it people find that something else is better, then so much the better.
In regards to China's class structure, I am not the one to ask for real materialist analysis. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40711-020-00116-9
Xin Liu from Department of Sociology, Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China has come to the conclusion from his rigorous data-backed materialist analysis that the ruling class of china is the "command class", which is the Communist Party of China which is comprised of the proletarians and represents the interests of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie are subject to the proletariat ruling class according to this model and materialist analysis.
Got any sources which aren't the revisionist CPC?
that was not the CPC. That was an accredited independent chinese sociologist
Meanwhile, the majority of Marxists will agree China isn't socialist and is no longer a DotP.
People who say that China is neither socialist nor a dictatorship of the proletariat, as demonstrated, cannot be Marxists, because they ignore or distort the facts and logic of China’s socialism, and they apply a narrow and dogmatic interpretation of "Marxism" that is irrelevant to existing material conditions.
It's called not wanting a second job alongside being a wagecuck. You think mothers wave magic wands? Hell no. Pregnancy and raising a child is WORK that you're not being paid for. At least porky is giving you some meager wages.
Upon the basis of the science of marxism-leninism.
I assumed we finished the "sampling isn't real music" debate a while ago.
From the perspective of capitalism raising a child is not work, unless it is compensated for. It is a socially necessary personal good (in totality, though on the margins it often is not even socially necessary, and occasionally even a social detriment). Effectively it's a hobby.
Using the """marxist feminist""" terminology, the "uncompensated labor" of childrearing could be "solved" by forcibly taking away a child from their mother after birth, and giving it to a paid agent, either of the state or some private entity.
Do you seriously think that this would be emancipatory?
Furthermore, is it an injustice that I receive no monetary compensation for cleaning my house, eating, bathing myself, or exercising? Certainly these are all socially necessary, are they not?<you just don't view childrearing as "real work" because you're a misogynist who stupidly thinks it's easy
The issue isn't that childrearing isn't hard enough. Obviously there are plenty of jobs that parenting decently is harder than (from what I've heard it's over half and I have no reason to doubt this). It's that it is structurally a personal good because it is not done to achieve a social function (even if it is required in aggregate), that is, it is not done (at least nowhere near primarily) for the wants of some abstract others, but it is done to fulfill personal wants.
In the imagined standard arrangement of breadwinner husband and stay at home wife (which it should be reminded was barely if at all a majority in the US in its supposed heyday and is certainly not the majority arrangement today) the husband and wife both want the child. The husband thus effectively (through marriage) pays the wife for the vast majority of the upkeep of child. Obviously in the 50s these marriages were unequal relations, and the effective payment, even by a bourgeois standard was unfair. But saying that it is the failure of society or the bourgeoisie that they do not pay for a personal good is absurd. And just like eating, it is a socially necessary personal good. Just like eating the demand for subsidization of it is sensible, but payment is ridiculous.
Are you suggesting capitalism doesn’t need a new source of labour?
Why does China having IP mean anything? If younger folks are skeptical of copyright as a thing why should we believe IP would continue to be enforced under socialism anywhere else?
No. I literally said that it is socially necessary. The whole point of comparing it to eating (which obviously capitalism also requires its proles to eat), was to demonstrate that socially necessary=/=labor.
If you're talking about the time I said that it sometimes isn't socially necessary on margin, that is referring to the fact that while capitalism needs /some/ people to have children, it might not need or want /another/ person to have a child.
Best critique of IP from a Marxist source?
There are no valid "marxist" arguments against copyright laws in socialist states and economies. Argumentation is dependent upon material conditions, and material conditions have determined that copyright laws are socially necessary under socialism. Marxists advocate for copyright laws to develop productive forces to build communism.
Why is copyright wrong under capitalism but ought to be preserved under socialism?
no reason. the only form of "copyright" that exists should be a one-time payment to the inventor or creator in order to pay for the thought leaving their head, after that point the idea no longer belongs to them. copyright is patenting memes in the same way monsanto patents gene sequences. it's a crime against humanity to privatize things that belong to all mankind.
this is bourgeois american copyright enforcement. The communist nation of china uses ip laws scientifically to the people's interests
Are you from Infrared?
>>9382>>9642>>9897https://web.archive.org/web/20120218212400/http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20061127%2FENT04%2F111270003>It was near the end of summer 2005, and James Yancey was sitting in a hospital bed at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles.>He couldn't walk. He could barely talk. And after spending most of the winter and spring in the hospital, receiving treatment for a rare, life-threatening blood disease and other complications, he had been re-admitted.>His body was killing him, and little could be done about it.>It was a grim prognosis, but it wasn't deterring him from tinkering with his electronic drum machine.>In the sterile white hospital room, the tools of his trade surrounded him: turntables, headphones, crates of records, a sampler, his drum machine and a computer, stuff his mother and friends from L.A.-based record label Stones Throw had lugged to his hospital room. Sometimes his doctor would listen to the beats through Yancey's headphones, getting a hip-hop education from one of the best in the business.>Yancey tampered with his equipment until his hands swelled so much he could barely move them. When the pain was too intense, he'd take a break. His mother massaged his fingertips until the bones stopped aching.>Then he'd go back to work. Sometimes he'd wake her up in the middle of the night, asking to be moved from his bed to a nearby reclining chair so he could layer more hard-hitting beats atop spacey synths or other sampled sounds, his creations stored on computer. Yancey told his doctor he was proud of the work, and that all he wanted to do was finish the album.>Before September ended, he'd completed all but two songs for "Donuts," a disc that hit stores on Feb. 7, his 32nd birthday.>Three days after its release, he died.
who tf makes an album when they're dying from illness??
>>10238>who tf makes an album when they're dying from illness??
He who has a "why" to live for can bear almost any "how", dummy.
This makes me want to rage.
IP laws never get abused in China?
If you do some research you’ll realize China does a very poor (probably deliberately so) job of enforcing IP.
“NoT rEaL cOpYrIgHt.”
>>9913> Funny enough, most Wobbly songs were based on Christian hymns that comrades took and subverted by turning the lyrics anti-clerical and anti-capitalist.
Not the same thing as modern sampling.
Copyright is actually better under capitalism because it helps consumers avoid scams.
There is bourgeois copyright law and there is communist copyright law
Read this theory to understand how Chinese Communist intellectual property law serves the proletariat.
See the noted example. There are countless others, for China's prosperity is a testament to the viability of communist intellectual property law
Try citing something that isn’t CPC press releases.
CPC press releases are the theoretical basis for communist IP laws
Blacks tend to be in denial of their own mortality. That’s why you see so much reckless living in the hood. Sex, guns and drugs and other debauchery is common there for a reason. You can’t say it’s all because of poverty because poor whites don’t behave like that. Poor whites are a lot more conservative and clean while poor blacks are a lot more impulsive and self destruct unintentionally because they think they’re invincible.
The overlap is very strong though. I see no difference between ATCQ recycling a Lou Reed instrumental and Joe Hill recycling some melody from a well-known hymn.
Again, interesting how whites always get a free pass when it comes to this stuff.>>10262>>10266>>10268
I'm not going to take the bait this time. I'll just tell you you're full of shit and move on. And I'm almost certain you're one of Haz's fanboys, no?>>10270>Blacks tend to be in denial of their own mortality. That’s why you see so much reckless living in the hood.
The opposite. Black folks are much more aware of their own mortality which is why they choose to live-live rather than just survive. When you've dealt with 400 years of extreme hardship you choose to be positive and find the good in everything in order to keep you going.
If you walk into a Black church (I don't because I'm Jewish but still) you'll notice how the service is always very lively with singing and dancing. Their prayers are never solemn like white people's prayers are. They don't sulk around like white people. (I say this as someone who lived in Baltimore City for a time.) There's a reason hip hop started in the Bronx and not Kentucky, and there's a reason why Black culture resonates with so many people whereas "white culture" (LOL!) doesn't.
The amount of racism ITT is off the charts anyway, even for leftypol.
You still have yet to prove exactly why Chinese communist IP law is not in line with the interests of the proletariat.
I don't have to prove a negative.
It is your negative to prove. You've consistently maintained that china is not communist and implied that their intellectual property laws are not in the interests of the proletariat.
Why are chinese communist intellectual property policies not in the interests of the proletariat?
How is communist intellectual property law incompatible with the primary stage of socialist development?
Are you from Infrared?
Poor whites have vastly different histories and material conditions. Gang culture originated in American cities with the Irish and Italians and Black and Latino people simply inherited that.
Carpe diem attitudes arise from knowing your life expectancy isn’t very good.
Nothing wrong with that.
>guns and drugs
Literally forced on them by whites.
If China was still communist SHEIN and all its labour abuses wouldn’t exist.
You don’t even hide the fact you hate the white working class.
The CPC defends their robust communist IP laws that promote development of proletarian culture and science
This proves my point about Marxism being useless. How can you claim to be the same ideology and follow the same exact methodology and come to two entirely different conclusions?
I can go to a Trot party and see them promote a political program worse than the DSA’s current political program. I can go to a tankie party meeting in which all they do is fanboy modern China and modern DPRK. I can go to a Maoist org meeting where all they do is attack all other leftists for being revisionist. And I’m supposed to believe this is the same exact ideology? Please.
So what's your alternative exactly? Objective politics doesn't exist just like objective morality doesn't. Hardly like anarchists all agree either is it? They just don't bring up how their system is actually supposed to work so they don't have to argue about it.
Anarchists never claim to be unified or have a unified praxis. Proudhon and Kropotkin are very, very different yet both recognizable as anarchists. Meanwhile, Marxists insist on being unified yet split more often than Protestant churches.
I am the only marxist here. I am the one who understands the historical necessity of IP law and its function in the primary stage of development of the socialist mode of production. The others are not marxists, or even leftists.
Actual marxists and actual leftists would support china, obviously.
Being a Marxist means thinking China can do no wrong?
Isn’t that undialectical?
China has done no "wrong". The Communist Party of China does only what is right: that being what is historically necessary for the development of socialism.
This isn’t a Marxist take.
This may be shocking, but the Communist Party of China IS Marxism.
They don’t even claim Marxism anymore.
What the fuck does marxism even mean to you? It's a philosophy and methodology for analysis, not something a person or group can be.
“tHe ReAl Is RaTiOnAl.”
>>9403>The reason most sampling these days is "lazy" is because record companies charge producers over $300,000 for a sample. The music industry is highly monopolized so they're able to get away with that. It's precisely the reason why you only see sampling in cheap pop songs made by "big names": they can afford it.
I’d add to this by saying the other main reason a lot of sampling in pop/rap today sounds like shit is due to what’s being sampled. Back in the 90s producers would go to record stores and look for the most obscure records they could find in order to sample them. That’s why so much 90s rap is based on samples from Brazilian jazz or Indian folk music or some unknown R&B. Nowadays producers sample very familiar tunes because the audience “gets” the reference.
The fact SHEIN exists is proof China is no longer communist.
What exactly is wrong with shein? Drip is socially necessary
Daily reminder the point of Marxism isn’t about being dogmatically loyal to “the method” but using the method to better material conditions IRL.
This is what the communist party of China does.
Marxism is a living and breathing science, not some mere spook. Marxism is not merely a mode of analysis, but also a mode of action. The chinese communist party is real marxism.
So why are you insisting “everything CPC does is Marxism” rather than just being honest about the CPC needing capitalist elements in order to grow productive forces?
So if I become a Marxist my entire existence has to be about cheerleading China?
This is what CPUSA did with the Soviet Union and it killed the party.
Everything that the CPC does IS in fact marxism, because the CPC applies marxist analysis and praxis to the material conditions of China. The CPC DO IN FACT use "capitalist elements", in the sense that the CPC and the Chinese proletariat have enslaved the bourgeoisie and use the bourgeoisie's mechanisms against them to establish and develop Chinese Socialist society which is based upon common ownership of property.>>10316
Yes. Any actual marxist will always cheerlead the proletarian movement and existing proletarian states. This is not mindless support, but a strategic move made as the result of unending marxist class analysis of extant material conditions.
The CPUSA did not die because they supported the Soviet Union. This very idea is porkistry. The CPUSA died due to the FBI.
So this is the endless bait thread, huh.
Do fuck off please. Keep this thread about music.
This thread is about socialism and intellectual property in relation to music. OP posits that IP does not exist in socialism, though this proposition is utterly negated by PRC.
China isn’t the “pope” of socialism.
China is the corporeal body of socialism. China is not the "pope" of socialism. China is the foremost example from history of a socialist society. China is the most highly developed, marxist, and most communist state of history. China is the guardian and torchbearer of the proletariat. China is the current leader of the communist movement.
The People must have a Party. If not China, then who??? What party and state is of the People????
CHINA IS MARXISM. CHINA IS SOCIALISM. CHINESE IP LAW IS SOCIALISM.
Please list your grievances with Chinese socialist intellectual property law. Why is this incompatible with socialism???https://english.cnipa.gov.cn/col/col3068/index.html
socialism is when high gdp
Last time I’m responding to this bait:
What are your thoughts on Chiba’s relationship with apartheid Israel?
Mossad asset Robert Maxwell was one of the guardians of modern IP law.
The guy that put Milli Vanilli together.
It is socially and historically necessary for the construction and development of communism
Robert Maxwell drank water and would probably be a "guardian" or proponent of drinking water. Is water bad?
NGL this reminds me of how Tupac (who was a comrade FYI) knew he was going to die young and allegedly told his homies what to do with his music when that day came. That’s why he made a bunch of recordings that only got released like five years after he died. Everything was strategic because he predicted his own death.
Oh hell, even Juice WRLD said “we’re not making it past 21” in his song Legends, and then he OD’d on opioids and died at 21.
TBH the only time I could ever see IP/copyright being justified is when it comes to academia and intellectual labour. Plagiarism is a huge problem in the academy and if I spend months researching a certain topic for the purpose of a journal article or my dissertation I’m going to flip my shit if someone copied my research and publishes their article first, or copies my work without giving me any credit,
TBH there’s no point to debating this when sampling will be here forever thanks to the internet and FL Studio.
This is an excellent point. Intellectual property law would still exist in the most late stage communism. Even when everyone is an artist or scientist, people would still own their creations.
Then you would have to publish your article first. You aren’t entitled to be “protected” on some abstract notion of “I own this thesis”.
If I can’t bootleg it’s not my revolution.
>>9266>3:00 — “mutilating moral rights”
How is that even a thing?
Patent Law in Early Communist China
Contrary to the theoretical framework that communists have on protecting intellectual property, most governments, including China, in practice have provided at least minor amounts of patent law protection. During the early years of Communist China, certain laws provided minor economic recompense to inventors. Despite this, the ideology behind these laws were of communist origins. The first laws created in China during this time were the "Provisional Regulations on the Protection of the Invention Right and the Patent Right," passed and on August 11, 1950, and the "Provisional Regulations on Awards for Inventions, Technical Improvements, and Rationalization Proposals Relating to Production of May 6." In these laws, the inventor was given a choice between a patent where they could exclude others from using the invention or a certificate of authorship. If the inventor chose to to use a patent, he was offered the following rights (Collection of Laws and Regulations of the Peole's Republic of China):
(1) He may use his own capital or form a corporation to operate an enterprise using his invention for production;
(2) he may assign the patent to another person or license it to any organization or individual;
(3) without the patentee's permission, another person may not use his invention;
(4) he may bequeath the patent right, and his heirs will enjoy the same rights as he;
(5) during the term of the patent, the patentee (or his heirs), if he has neither assigned nor licensed the patent, may request the central principal organ [the Central Bureau of Technological Management of the Finance and Economic Committee of the Government Administration Council] to convert the patent right into an invention right.
However, the state retained the power to take control of a patent at any time, thus ensuring that anything created could be forced to be transferred to public ownership. The certificate of authorship essentially gave "ownership" to the state. It provided certain benefits and monetary compensation for the inventors to incentivize this option. The government would then provide awards to those who had especially significant contributions. Tao-Tai Hsia and Kathryn A. Haun stated that rewards were up to about 250,000 yuan, or about $104,000 US dollars (At the time). These patents and certificates of authorship would last from three to fifteen years, depending on what the government decided. While this provided certain incentive to invent, control over the intellectual property was still primary held by the Communist party through the certificates and the power to take control of patents. They justified the protection because the government would use the property to make the life of everyone in society better as a whole.
Further reforms were instituted in the "Regulation on Awards and Inventions" which was issued November 3, 1963. It instituted a key statement, that "All inventions are the property of the state, and no person or unit may claim monopoly over them. All units throughout the country (including collectively owned units) may make the use of inventions essential to them."(Collection of Laws and Regulations of the Peole's Republic of China) This was to further justify patent law in the idea that all property was collectively owned by the government. Analysis of these reforms by Tao-Tai Hsia and Kathryn A. Haun leads that, "The Communist Chinese apparently found the idea of the patent ideologically unpalatable, even if its practical importance had been vitiated by the structure of the economy and the official attitude towards patents." In this reform, patents were eliminated entirely, and there were changed rewards for certificates of authorship. There became five levels of certificates, with each one justifying a certain amount of monetary compensation. The highest level rewarded 10,000 yuan and the fifth level only rewarded 500 yuan. These reforms represent the most traditional Communist views that were enacted in China during the time of their intense communist reform.
Notice how this was decades before the internet made enforcing IP nearly impossible.
>>10292>And I’m supposed to believe this is the same exact ideology?
They aren’t the same ideology and Marxists have always had plenty of ideological divisions. Trots tail whatever they see as being a leftist cause. Maoists are obsessed with moral purity for reasons they never specify. Tankies just do whatever other socialist states do.
Iran is based because they don't enforce copyright laws. They even have apps to get streaming services like Netflix for free in HD. The father of the Iranian New Wave, Dariush Mehrjui said, “In our country, we don’t have copyrights. We feel free to read and do whatever we want.”
Sad how Iran is more socialist than China in this aspect.
Third post best post
He settled quickly because he knows way more women were about to join the suit.
Also, how do you start a label and everyone involved is dead but you?
The pettiest theft = socialism to the lumpen? Iran is anti-imperialist in that regard, not socialist.
Why doesn’t Iran have copyright and China does?
iran has copyright laws
it probably has more to do with trying to skirt around US sanctions than "socialism" lol. The russian government unblocked rutracker for similar reasons. If private entreprise can't come knocking at your door, demanding a king's ransom for their intellectual "property" without risking hefty fines from the US gov, what's really stopping you from distributing fucking Star Wars for free?
This exactly. They just don't abide by bourgeois imperialist american copyright laws, so they are able to print textbooks without paying King's ransom.
The chinese and Iranians create their own copyright law to survive and destroy western bourgeois imperialism
What makes you think China actually cares about IP in principle instead of cynically using it as a form of legal protectionism because it was already established internationally?
the article indicates he was very aware of his own mortality but yeah generalize all black people i guess
That, and China is very, very lax Wigner it comes to actually enforcing IP.
Because if there’s one thing terminally ill people are known for it’s being totally open and honest about how sick they are. Right.
Accreditation does not equal intellectual property ownership.
You will have to elaborate more.
all the people in the video are being threatened with legal action though
Could you explain the parallels between this and the examples of "IP theft" in OP's video?
Sampling is god. Copyright is joke.
All of those involved in such legal squabbles are petty-bourgeoisie who are not fighting for accreditation, but over intellectual property ownership (fictitious capitals) and values. This video is entirely the logic of capital, a self-serving attempt to assert the petty-bourgeoisie's exclusive rights of value extraction "from their ideas™". Hbomberfly represents his class and campaigns for youtube to give stronger intellectual property rights to the petty-bourgeoisie. Hbomberfly is not arguing for accreditation, but for augmented petty-bourgeois privileges, and thusly greater appropriation of values produced by the proletariat. The whine of "plagiarism" is but a moral pretext to justify this. The "content" is not a source of value, or research, but of mass waste.
This is a travesty.
How is it possible to eradicate an entire genre of music???
It would be funny if they won.
at least the amen break guy was some homeless artist this would just benefit some fucking estate
Unique IPs: 145