Reuse & Derivatives
Sampling
Sampling reuses the actual recording of another track, so it touches two copyrights — you must clear both the master (from the recording owner) and the composition (from the publisher).
A sample copies the actual recorded sounds of an existing track, so it touches both copyrights in that track: the sound recording and the composition. There is no compulsory license for either — you negotiate a master-use license with the recording owner and a license with the publisher.
Clearances are usually an up-front fee plus an ongoing royalty or co-ownership share on both the master and the publishing of your new track. Courts take this seriously: in *Bridgeport Music v. Dimension Films* the Sixth Circuit said "get a license or do not sample," while the Ninth Circuit (*VMG Salsoul v. Ciccone*) allows a narrow "de minimis" defense — a split that makes clearing every sample the only safe path.
The clean contrast: a sample uses the original recording (clear master and composition); an interpolation re-records the part yourself (composition only).
Good to know
Sampling: common questions
- Can I use a tiny sample without clearing it?
- Don't rely on it. One federal circuit allows a "de minimis" defense for very short samples; another rejects it outright. The industry-standard, litigation-safe approach is to clear every sample on both the master and composition side.
- Who gets paid when I clear a sample?
- Both the owner of the original recording (a master-use license) and the original songwriter and publisher (the composition) — typically a fee plus a negotiated share of your track’s royalties and/or ownership.