Since its emergence in 15th and 16th century Europe, copyright law has remained a complex subject and it is very difficult to balance the laws so that they mutually benefit artists. and the public. The U.S. government has faced many challenges in adapting to new times, including creating numerous laws since 1790 that have increased the term of copyright so that artists have more control over their works. However, in music, it is essential that copyright laws are updated and new ones created in order to stay in touch with a changing music industry. Many believe that copyright policymakers support copyright owners in order to encourage creativity, but it is clear that legislators have always had more respect for the public interest. The way copyright law works today is outdated in music and does not reflect the ever-changing production techniques used in the music industry. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essay Modern music technology is growing rapidly and becoming more and more accessible to the general public, allowing more people to be creative and create new and innovative music. However, the rise of this technology is leading to new production processes and methods, some of which are not covered by current copyright laws, such as sampling. For example, MC Hammer's "U Can't Touch This" and Vanilla Ice's "Ice, Ice, Baby" both relied heavily on a particular sample, Rick James' "Superfreak" and Queen's "Under Pressure" and David Bowie respectively. Both hits resulted in legal controversy – Hammer settled out of court with James and gave him a co-composer credit and a share of the royalties, and Ice gave songwriting credits to Queen and Bowie (Yglesias). The outcomes of these cases were fair, but the systematic consequences were far more serious than people anticipated. After these two cases, most major record labels required clearance of the samples, which prevented many artists who created sample "collages" from selling their music. For example, the year before the MC Hammer deal, the Beastie Boys released one of their most famous records, Paul's Boutique, which contained over 300 samples (Yglesias). If it had been released after the Hammer and Ice trials, it would have been impossible for their record company to release it without being sued, as they would not have bothered to try to clear the large quantity of samples. The legality of sampling is a broad area at present, and it is unclear whether copyright policymakers plan to address it more clearly. Another significant flaw in current copyright law is the way court cases are decided with outdated methods, and how this leads some artists who clearly copy people's sound to escape the law. For example, Caramanica said of the infamous "Blurred Lines" case: "the jury was instructed to base its decision on the score" (Caramanica). However, with the rise of digital audio workstations, or DAWs, in popular music production, the use of sheet music in music production has declined sharply. It is incredibly unfair thatmusic be analyzed with notation and scores if it was not created using such scores, and copyright law should adapt to new production techniques in order to keep in touch with new styles of music. An example of two songs that further prove this point are "Fancy" by Iggy Azalea and Charli XCX and "Don't Hurt Me" by DJ Mustard. Throughout his career, DJ Mustard has used a crisp, bouncy bass line that has become his signature sound, and it is the main element of the track "Don't Hurt Me" (Caramanica). The Invisible Men and Arcade, the two producers of "Fancy", clearly copied DJ Mustard's signature sound, without a doubt, and it's sad that we don't have the legal basis to sue them and have an effective case. Not only did they copy the bass synthesizer, but they also used an 808 beat accompanied by a "Hey!" sample the backbeats of the verses, both of which are not exclusive to DJ Mustard, but are commonly used in his tracks. Finally, the tempo is the same, the drum beats are very similar, both tracks use female rappers, and they both have a catchy vocal chorus delivered by a featured artist. The only thing that differs between the instrumental of "Fancy" and any DJ Mustard beat is that the former does not include DJ Mustard's signature, which he places at the beginning of all his tracks. For this reason, it would be fair if he received co-production credits as well as royalties. However, because copyright law has not adapted to modern music, it has little to offer an artist like DJ Mustard, whose signature sound lies not in the notes, but in the sound design and the atmosphere. Appropriate copyright law should be modernized so that artists can defend their unique qualities as music producers, particularly in sound design and rhythmic qualities. Finally, it is important that copyright law be changed so that artists who are harmed have more control over the actions they wish to take. These days, it's usually up to the original artist's label to decide what to do with the infringing artist. However, copyright laws should give more power to the original artist. For example, Danger Mouse's "Grey Album" was a tribute to both Jay-Z and The Beatles, who both loved the album and were incredibly impressed by the production. The album wasn't even intended to be released - Danger Mouse said: "I just sent out a few tracks and now people are selling it and downloading it everywhere... it wasn't my intention to break any copyright laws." copyright” (Rimmer). The record was accidentally leaked and Jay-Z and the Beatles had no intention of suing Danger Mouse. However, the Beatles' copyright holder, EMI, had other plans: they decided to sue Danger Mouse and order all retailers to cease distribution of the record. Paul McCartney was adamantly against EMI's decision and said: "It didn't bother me when something like that happened with The Gray Album. But the record company cared. They made a fuss” (Rimmer). If all the original artists were against the copyright case, it would be ridiculous if the copyright law was designed in a way that gave them no power against the label's decision, which should be changed . Original artists should be given the opportunity to negotiate with their respective record labels as to whether a copyright case should be filed, whether other..