Pelham GmbH v. Hütter (Kraftwerk Sampling Case) – 2019

“A few seconds of sound can trigger liability — unless the sample is transformed beyond recognition.”

Short Description

This landmark decision clarified the legality of music sampling within the EU. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) examined whether using even a two-second snippet from a sound recording without permission could amount to copyright infringement. The ruling balanced artistic freedom and exclusive phonogram rights, ultimately stating that any untransformed, recognizable copy violates the rights of the original producer.

Facts

The dispute arose when Pelham GmbH, a music production company, incorporated a short, looped, two-second rhythm sequence from Kraftwerk’s 1977 track “Metall auf Metall” into a new song. Ralf Hütter and Florian Schneider, founding members of Kraftwerk, discovered that the beat in Pelham’s composition matched their original sound recording exactly. The sample was small, but it was taken directly from their master recording. Kraftwerk claimed this unauthorized extraction infringed their phonogram producer rights. Pelham argued the snippet was too minimal and barely perceptible to the average listener.

Findings / Reasoning

The CJEU emphasized that a phonogram producer enjoys the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the reproduction of any part of their sound recording. Even a very short portion can fall under protection if it is recognizable. The Court rejected the argument that a sample must be “substantial” in length to qualify for infringement. However, it carved out an important exception:

if a sample is modified so that it becomes unrecognizable to the ear, it does not constitute reproduction of the original phonogram.

The Court also acknowledged the importance of artistic freedom in genres like hip-hop but concluded that sampling cannot override the producer’s rights unless genuine transformation occurs.

Suggestions / Observations

The judgment serves as a warning to music producers, DJs, and artists that even micro-samples require licensing unless heavily altered. It encourages the creation of original beats rather than relying on direct extraction. Musicians must either obtain explicit permission or ensure the sample is modified to a point where it no longer resembles the original. The Court’s approach protects the significant investment behind sound recordings while leaving room for creativity through transformative use.

Judgment & Date

The CJEU held that Pelham infringed Kraftwerk’s phonogram rights by using a recognizable, unlicensed audio sample.

Judgment Date : 29 July 2019