data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/364a9/364a93cc5e239f4c8016444a7b5f54ff01bc34a8" alt="Ok computer radiohead tattoo"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0286f/0286f1f26066254bfa803cc745968de7463b27b1" alt="ok computer radiohead tattoo ok computer radiohead tattoo"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa43a/aa43aabcd19b44db5831728c7b771d27f938b70e" alt="ok computer radiohead tattoo ok computer radiohead tattoo"
In other words, I get why a record label isn’t allowed to sell their own bootleg pressing of OK Computer without the express consent of its masters’ owner. It’s their property, and no one should have the right to take it away from them or their estate. I get that Radiohead worked hard and insvested good money to create their track. I see the argument for the protection of an artist’s work. I think it’s fucked up that musicians still aren't free to use samples freely to express themselves creatively. What I can say, I can say it as an amateur music critic and a middling musician who has fiddled his fair share of samples. I’m probably not the best person to get into the legal mumbo jumbo surrounding the art of sampling.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/364a9/364a93cc5e239f4c8016444a7b5f54ff01bc34a8" alt="Ok computer radiohead tattoo"