The Struggle
In 2004, two young men with a vision decided they wanted to create music. Starting out with nothing but a small Radio Shack keyboard, one artist, two musicians and a raggedy basement, they began to compose. Knowing what a tremendous sacrifice, not to mention the dividends it takes to start an organization- let alone a music organization, the harmony began to take over. Performing first at community centers and dubbing low quality tapes, that sold for five dollars, out the back of trunks was the daily procedure for them.
One particular day the owner, Tate came up with a brilliant plan involving the super promotion of both the artist, Young Scrap and the music engineer, Ransome. They decided to take what little money they had along with the dividends from the “Trunk” business and throw a “reach the streets” concert in the middle of four known territorial neighborhoods. This concert alone not only brought popularity to the artist and engineer, it brought peace to the area. The participating businesses in the area were glad to get free publicity. This caused major donations to be given in the name of peace, accord, and good music. Out of that concert these neighborhoods formed an alliance which caused more artist and engineers to step up to the plate and create harmony.
Today TNT (The Next Track) has four accredited music engineers, three flourishing artists, and a host of other talent. TNT also aids the community, specifically targeting the youth. They offer free vocal lessons, music lessons, and recording discounts to youths under the age of sixteen.TNT is a highly motivational and influential organization focused on encouraging the positivity of the community. TNT’s artist Young Scrap and B-more Starr have performed at numerous venues such as Velvet Rope, Club Reality, and my dear Alma-Ata, Coppin State University.
The Real Hero
In reviving the brilliance of Scott Joplin, one must first understand and embrace the concept of ragtime as well as how it came about. Ragtime is defined in the dictionary as an original musical genre which main characteristic trait is its syncopated, or "ragged," rhythm. Ragtime originated shortly after the Civil War ended. It was created by black musicians in the cities of the Midwest who had found a way to recreate something like the percussive sound of the banjo on the piano.One might learn a great deal from Joplin’s life and death. Scott took his music seriously. He displayed a talent that not only did he excel in it but, he created a whole new style and genre that will always be remembered. Ragtime is still played all over the world and yes- it still is difficult. Scott not only created something different, bold, new, and exciting, he also wrote it down for the disapprovers to see. Ragtime also followed rules, much like the Masurka’s of Chopin or the Inventions of Bach-all difficult European pieces. Scott Joplin was an individual of valor, one whom was disciplined in the art of music, both theory and composition. He is incredibly, an astounding visionary who truly earned the title, “Father of Ragtime”.
In reviving the brilliance of Scott Joplin, one must first understand and embrace the concept of ragtime as well as how it came about. Ragtime is defined in the dictionary as an original musical genre which main characteristic trait is its syncopated, or "ragged," rhythm. Ragtime originated shortly after the Civil War ended. It was created by black musicians in the cities of the Midwest who had found a way to recreate something like the percussive sound of the banjo on the piano.One might learn a great deal from Joplin’s life and death. Scott took his music seriously. He displayed a talent that not only did he excel in it but, he created a whole new style and genre that will always be remembered. Ragtime is still played all over the world and yes- it still is difficult. Scott not only created something different, bold, new, and exciting, he also wrote it down for the disapprovers to see. Ragtime also followed rules, much like the Masurka’s of Chopin or the Inventions of Bach-all difficult European pieces. Scott Joplin was an individual of valor, one whom was disciplined in the art of music, both theory and composition. He is incredibly, an astounding visionary who truly earned the title, “Father of Ragtime”.
What About Rick Ross?
When any artist receives recognition, pay, or gifts, for any artistry; it is assumed that the image, name, and/or work belongs solely to the artist unless stipulated otherwise. Upon using someone’s name and image of that name without permission of those persons or entities, the artist as well as the properties thereof may be held accountable for any consequences or rewards of said name and image. In this particular case, “Rick Ross” literally stole Ricky Ross’s identity. “Rick” did not simply mention Ricky, or display him in a satirical way, he modeled himself as him and conducted himself as such; all while portraying his life to be that of Ricky Ross, resulting in “Rick Ross” becoming very rich and famous. One would doubt if Rick Ross’s real name, career, and image would have gotten him that far in the industry. Maybe if “Rick Ross” would not have raped this man’s entire identity, he would not be prone to giving up 50%. However, throughout “Rick Ross’s” entire career; from his first debut till now (even after he changed his name due to the legal technicalities), he is still known as “Rick Ross” and probably forever more will be. He is a product of something that he stole and owes acknowledgement to Ricky. Qualities such as name, image, and work are infinite in the artist industry. He did not create a false image, sell out his unique image, or cultivate himself as an artist. He stole a man’s identity (his life). Yes, he should owe. However, the question remains, should one be able to capitalize off of illegal entities? One would think that the real Ricky Ross would win this case. A personal opinion would be that “Rick Ross” more than likely would settle. The reason is that a great number of excellent, high paid lawyers are representing the real Ricky. One would believe they know they can get paid something out of the case.
The Truth Behind "The Matrix"
Upon reading the Sophia Stewart, Mother of the “Matrix” case, it was discovered that Sophia Stewart, a native of New York, will not recover the damages from a lawsuit involving Warner Brothers, Wachowski Brothers, and Joel Silver. Sophia Stewart argues that the “Matrix” Trilogy and “The Terminator” were all derived from her creation; a book entitled “The Third Eye”.
Earlier in the mid-eighties, Sophia Stewart submitted the manuscript of “The Third Eye” to the Wachowski Brothers in correspondence to an ad requesting new science fiction works. In 1999, Stewart filed her case. After viewing the “Matrix”, Sophia Stewart strongly felt had been based on her manuscript, “The Third Eye”.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation discovered very interesting facts according to court documentation. More than thirty minutes were edited from the original film in an attempt to avoid penalties from copyright infringement. The FBI states that credible witnesses employed at Warner Brothers came forward stating that the executives and lawyers had complete knowledge that the “Matrix” Trilogy did not belong to the Wachowski Brothers. Also, those same witnesses even claimed that during the preparation for the motion pictures, Sophia Stewart’s original creation was used as a reference guide to assist with the films.
Some of the Matrix fans are quite loyal to the Wachowski Brothers. Those fans mock Sophia Stewart and detest the idea of her having anything to do with the fans beloved science fiction films. Other fans, strongly devoted to Sophia Stewart, have on-line columns exclaiming her story and the fan’s favor of Sophia’s position. Some folks are not even aware that such a case was going on. That may be largely due to the fact that the case has received almost no media coverage. The case was made public in 2003.
Sophia Stewart stated, “The reason you have not seen any of this in the media is because Warner Brothers parent company is AOL- Time Warner… this giant owns 95 percent of the media… let me give you a clue as to what they own in the media business… New York Times papers/magazines, LA Times papers/magazines, People Magazine, CNN news, Extra, Celebrity Justice, Entertainment Tonight, HBO, New Line Cinema, DreamWorks, Newsweek, Village Roadshow… many, many more!... They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years…”[1]
In reviving the case, The Mother of the “Matrix”, there is much information and many ideas to examine including interesting entities such as copyright infringement, racketeering, lawyer abandonment, and the case ruling. Upon reading the Sophia Stewart Case and ruling of said case, from a personal point of view the position chosen is that of being in favor of Stewart.
However, persons or professionals that decide to enter the entertainment field, especially those of color, must be aware of the written and unwritten laws. Dictionary.com defines copyright infringement as a violation of the rights secured by a copyright. As one has learned in Entertainment Law, a copy right is the exclusive right to make copies, license, and otherwise exploit a literary, musical, or artistic work, whether printed, audio, video, etc.: works granted such right by law on or after January 1, 1978, are protected for the lifetime of the author or creator and for a period of 50 years after his or her death. Copyright infringement is against the law and highly looked down upon. It appears that in this day and age, majority of consumers are not concerned if the works are original. A personal thought: even if the work is original, most of the consumers will burn, illegally download, or copy it anyway.
As for those lawyers, who pretended to stand by Sophia Stewart all those long hard years, and had the audacity to leave Sophia when the lawyers were needed most, that ordeal alone should be investigated. One could not help but to think that maybe the lawyers were threatened, especially when a crime as serious as racketeering is involved. Most lawyers, especially paid lawyers, at the time of one’s first interview with the lawyers, the lawyers take the case not on believability alone but, evidence and the notion that there is a strong chance of the lawyers winning the case.
As for a case as huge as this, one would assume that the lawyers accepted her case almost knowing the overcompensation that would come. One would assume this situation was a plight to diminish funds, humiliate, and disgrace Sophia. One could almost hear the corporate giants chuckling and snickering, How dare that n*#*!* girl to challenge me. Even though the case was dismissed, this is a victory for Sophia and other minority artist. The light is shined and the cat in the bag. Maybe Sophia will write a book about the case and ruling. The exposure to this case allows artists of all mediums to take the proper previsions and precautions before selling or giving away valuable work. All in all this case and other similar cases should serve as a warning and a lesson- one that will always be remembered.
I never did embrace the use of electronic instruments. The idea of sampling music at first was unappealing. With growing and evolving times, one cannot help to tolerate the music that is regurgitated. However, if you are truly a music fan, regardless of genre, music should be sought out until satisfied.
When an artists or producer knows exactly how and when to introduce the sampled music to their personal creation, it is inevitable to produce good quality music or even a hit.
The best experience is to actually listen to rap or hip hop artist rapping not over the soundtrack or instrumentals, but live, with an A-list orchestra.
.
