i definitely WOULD be surprised.
This has happened many times Patch. Im surprised youre not aware of this.
The reason you dont hear much about it anymore is that literally no one publishes music without cleared samples any more.
See the Verve/Rolling Stones disaster. They didnt clear the string sample (from a RS song) in Bittersweet symphony, and they never saw a dime of that song. It made tens of millions of dollars for the Rolling Stones.
So yes, its incredibly unlikely but as said upthread, publishers wont generally take a track with an uncleared sample if they have any idea what they are doing.
A guy on a forum sampling for fun is not the same as an established band using un-cleared samples.
No-one on this forum is playing by the same rules as The Verve!
If clearing a sample makes you 20 bucks. 20 bucks is 20 bucks. It may not be millions…
If you don’t think 20 bucks is worth the extra effort, then you can give me your 20 bucks. I would love an extra 20 bucks.
I’ve had success clearing samples. Was very easy actually. One email and you’re done.
If he releases a song with uncleared samples, its literally exactly the same. If it blows up, do you think the original rights holders are going to ignore it? At that point its too late to clear them, and he will lose all royalties. We are only talking about releasing it, not playing it live.
There are whole legal firms that do nothing but look for and report these uncleared samples in the hope of getting a retainer out of it.
Now Dangermouse actually used this mechanism when he released the Grey album, knowing full well that Sony would lodge a cease and desist immediately, which they did. He used the publicity from this to lanch his career, even though he couldnt make any money from the Grey album.
That is a fuckin’ HUGE “if”.
Posts like yours prevent creative people being creative!!! “If it blows up?” That’s a HUGE “if”.
What if it DOESN’T blow up, but the kid learns a TON from making it, and a bunch of his friends really like the track? That’s a lot of personal development that he’ll miss out on if he doesn’t put in the work with a sample that he/she loves.
I like your DM scenario - but I’d use that as an argument FOR using uncleared samples. 
Established artists (like The Verve) SHOULD clear samples - they’re financially benefiting DIRECTLY from someone elses IPR. BUT, kids learning to produce should sample the hell out of anything they want! 99.9% of those kids will go nowhere (unfortunately), but they’ll get a great deal of pleasure and personal development from sampling relentlessly.
He can also learn how to get samples cleared in the process…
There’s only si much fun that some people can handle, though… 
Sorry Patch, You are simply giving bad and dangerous advice here. You and I have only heard of the Verve because of Bittersweet Symphony. Before they released it they were just a local band that thought no one would care if they released a song with uncleared samples.
Are you getting it now? Thats only the biggest example, there are many many others. Dont you realise that practically every single hip hop album released nowadays on anything larger than a one man label has every single sample cleared? That there is an industry out there looking for these copyright violations to pounce on?
Your advice is completely out of step with modern industry standards Im afraid.
This has nothing whatsoever to with creativity. We are talking about RELEASING and PUBLISHING songs. There is nothing stopping OP from playing it out live or giving it to his friends. This is the third time ive said this, so stop misrepresenting me as if im telling him not to do it at all.
Oh and Dangermouse was LUCKY. Sony had the right and ability to take literally everything he had, and decided not to.
If only a track of mine would blow up as much as this thread! Haha.
Thanks for the input guys, it’s really interesting as well as helpful.
I’m with Patch on this.
The chances of it blowing up are small, and even if it did you would make a name for yourself even if you made no money - so you could make money once you were famous 
I cant believe Djs are so clueless about this. As said upthread in the Dangermouse example, Sony could have taken everything he owned and would possibly earn in his lifetime, or forced him into a horrible settlement. He was lucky.
Im not making things up. Your attitude is exactly the attitude that has led to several small artists losing all rights to a track, and never seeing a dime from it.
Anyway, its all theoretical. No proper label will publish anything with uncleared samples in the first place.
Its not 1985 any more guys.
We’re not clueless - we understand the laws. It’s not complicated, and you’re not a genius because you understand it.
I make the choice to use uncleared samples, because I don’t live in fear of one of my tracks “blowing up” and me not getting paid!
We’re just having fun here. The worst that has happened to me, is that I’ve had tracks removed from Soundcloud, which, to be honest, is a badge of honour these days anyway!!! 
Bottom line is - if you do use an uncleared sample, you’re choosing to do that, and we all understand the implications of doing it, so don’t bitch and whine if you’re called on your decision to use uncleared samples.
Me? I’ll sample whatever the hell I want, and put all my productions (well, most) up for free on Soundcloud (and, eventually hearthis.at). If it get’s taken down, c’est la vis. That’s th erisk you take when you sample.
Now, don’t get me wrong, if one of my tracks blows up, I’ll be overjoyed. I want people to enjoy what I make, and if a BUNCH of people enjoy it, that’s gonna make me feel great. BUT - I won’t expect to get PAID for what I’ve made if I’m using other peoples work as a basis for mine.
Basically - if you’re in this hoping to “blow up and get paid”, you’re in it for the wrong reasons. If you’re hoping to “blow up and get paid” using other peoples (cleared or uncleared) samples, you’re a cheat, and don’t deserve to get paid.
No need for insults Patch. I never referred to myself as a genius. At every point of my argument, ive provided evidence to back it up. Your entire argument is “dont worry it will be fine”. This is simply naive and wrong. Your advice in this post could lead directly to legal action to young producers. What you are saying was right in the 90s, it is not right now. Tracks go viral in a matter of hours, turning a bedroom producer into a touring festival performer. You are just wrong if you think no one is going to pursue them.
I dont want to get into a ‘thing’ with you, i respect your time and fair moderation on this board. But this is just bad advice.
Youve also got it backwards. It costs very little for an unknown producer to clear most samples. It costs as much as the rights holders can get away with to clear a sample when you are successful, that is if they dont just take all the profits from the song, the album, and maybe your lifetime.
Soundcloud has nothing to do with a commercial release. The fact that you even mention this suggests you are confused about the details of this. A soundcloud release is not going to trigger a legal firm. A release on a label is. No one is going to pursue you for a soundcloud release, its completely irrelevant to the topic we are talking about.
Have you had a release on a halfway decent label, that was happy to release a song with uncleared samples? Do you have any evidence at all that it will be fine, if the producer becomes a success? Because i can provide examples where it wasnt fine.
“The verdict against electro group Djuma Soundsystem for using an unauthorised sample in their track ‘Les DjinnsÂ’ has shocked many inside and outside the music industry. Speaking to theCopenhagen Post, former member Lars Bjarno accepted that what they did was stupid, but still cannot understand the size of the fine: 747,182.82 kroner plus costs.”
http://cphpost.dk/news14/culturenews...ight-case.html
“The creator of Harlem Shake could end up returning 100% of his earnings from the viral video hit after neglecting to clear two of the song’s most recognisable samples.”
http://www.theguardian.com/music/201...leared-samples
“In Ludlow Music Inc vs Williams (2000), a two–line lyrical ‘sample’ of the song ‘I’m The Way’, written by Loudon Wainwright III and published by Ludlow Music, formed the basis of a copyright dispute, when Robbie Williams used very similar lyrics in his own song ‘Jesus In A Camper Van’ — there was no use of the original recording, so the dispute only concerned copyright in the song itself. At considerable expense to the record label, the judge ruled that the Robbie song be removed from all future pressings of his album I’ve Been Expecting You. Robbie also lost out on 25 percent of the publishing income on ‘Jesus In A Camper Van’ to Ludlow Music, a figure said to be somewhere in the region of £50,000.”
“Rapper Kanye West has also topped the charts with his latest album offering Graduation, but much of the album’s royalties will actually find their way into the pockets of ’70s acts Steely Dan and Elton John, thanks to West’s bountiful sampling of these artists.”
Ill take advice from respected industry mag Sound On Sound rather than people on forums.
“Should you fail to clear the original sample before releasing your own record, you may be faced with a number of unwelcome legal consequences. You could be sued for damages for copyright infringement and face an injunction stopping you from continued sale of any infringing copies, as well as having to recall and destroy any CDs or DVDs incorporating uncleared samples. Your record label could even lumber you with the costs of this remedial work.”
Do what the pros do. Hire someone and have the paperwork hiring them to re-record the part you want to sample. Then use the original sample in the recording. It works for Dr Dre.
“Jay Z has found himself in legal trouble again and this time it looks like Hov will have to cough up some serious money. According to The Daily Mail, Jay Z, Timbaland, and Swizz Beatz failed to credit Swiss musician Bruno Spoerri on the Magna Carta Holy Grail song “Versus,” and will now have to fork over 50 percent of the song’s earnings.”
http://www.complex.com/music/2015/03...y-grail-sample
The bottom line is that if you are a bedroom producer, and you make an incredible track with an uncleared sample, you could literally lose everything. Isnt everyone making music hoping that something of theirs might blow up?
Say you released a track with an uncleared sample years ago. It was ignored. Fast forward several years, and you are a successful producer. A legal firm gets wind of your earlier release with an uncleared sample, and suddenly you, and everything you own is fair game.
“What is the risk? Using a sample without clearance is always risky. However, as a practical matter, if you only sell recordings at shows and don’t make more than one thousand copies, your risk is reduced. The owner of the source recording will be unlikely to learn of your samples. However, if your recording becomes popular at clubs or on the radio, or if a major label wants to pick it up, you’ll have to deal with sample clearance.”
So I’m clueless because I don’t agree with you?
If he plans on releasing it then obviously it needs clearing - it’s not even a consideration.
And if the 1 in a million happens & it goes viral - re-record the samples on the released version.
Plus I said if he doesn’t make a penny from it the exposure would still be worth it - and I stand by that - you’re talking shite & worrying about nothing.
A rights owner actually cannot charge you for using a sample unless you will make profit from its use. This is why most samples get cleared with either a limited use agreement, shared percentage agreement, or permission to use without sale.
Always clear your samples, or at least make an attempt to contact the original artist. If you can’t get it cleared, who gives a fuck. Just keep it for personal use and performance and don’t post it anywhere.
You clearly didnt read the links. At that point its too late.
Ive said from the very start that Im talking ONLY ABOUT COMMERCIAL RELEASES.
THE OP IS TALKING ABOUT A COMMERCIAL RELEASE.
FFS guys.
The OP is clearly talking about doing something commercial with the track, and Patch said not to worry it will be fine. It wont be fine and ive provided plenty of evidence to back that up.
“you’re talking shite & worrying about nothing.”
This is verbatim from the first link i provided in the last post. These guys followed this forums wisdom, and look what happened.
“We were young and stupid,” Bjarno said, adding that they had tried to find a way to reimburse the copyright holder. “We want to pay. But we dont want to pay a ridiculous amount that we haven’t even made on the record."
Instead of insulting me, how about someone post some evidence of a bedroom producer who didnt clear samples, had a song blow up, and everything was fine?
In fact if this was all fine, there should be plenty of stories and links you can show. Producers would be bragging about sampling and getting away with it.
And can one of you point to one of your commercial releases on a decent label with uncleared samples? Anyone?
[quote=“ImNoDJ”"]
THE OP IS TALKING ABOUT A COMMERCIAL RELEASE.
[/quote]
Does the OP sound like he has the first idea HOW to release something commercially? Or does he sound like a hobbyist that (perhaps) has delusions of grandeur?
Like I said - nothing that you have said is wrong (except that thing about The Verve being a “local band” before Bitter Sweet Symphony).
Using anybody else’s music or vocals in your own track is always a risk if the sample hasn’t been licensed properly. In the past, I have done it though and often it is just over looked especially in the indie/underground world. Sometimes labels will ask you to sign a contract saying that you cleared all of your samples or have the rights to use them and that will leave you with the responsibility of sorting out any legal problems down the road if there are repercussions.