a new band to hate? Kim Weatherall argues that copyright activists have a new band to hate -- the Beastie Boys:

Jazz composer James Newton sued Beastie Boys, who allegedly sampled part of Newton's composition "Choir", in BBs' song "Pass the Mic" without seeking permission. Six and a half seconds' worth; looped more than 40 times. Newton lost. Apparently it wasn't "original", because the score showed 3 notes (not the multiphonics in the recording). Not only did he lose, but BBs filed a motion seeking payment of their legal fees. US $492,000.

Now, as a "copyright activist," I do hate Metallica -- in fact, I make it a point to change the radio station every time a Metallica song comes on. But if anyone is the Metallica-style villain here, it's Newton. The Beasties sampled 6 seconds of his song and made a new song out of it. ("Sampling BAD.") Newton is the one who sued the Beasties. And so I have no problem with their asking to get compensated for their legal fees. ("Sampling BAD.") Jason Soon agrees with Kim, by the way:

it's exactly people like Newton that copyright laws were originally meant to give incentives to.

But to argue that the Beasties' sampling was somehow messing up the incentive structure, you'd have to make the case that some people who originally wanted to buy Newton's "Choir" would instead purchase the Beasties' "Pass the Mic," settling for a 6 second sample instead of the whole work. This strikes me as ludicrous. In fact, the reverse -- that the Beasties' sample might inspire people to check out "Choir" -- seems much more likely.