I do not support sampling. I feel that sampling is equivalent to someone breaking into your house and stealing a picture you painted. Or perhaps a better analogy would be if they broke into your house and stole a home-made cookie you made and then used computer software to analyze the contents of your cookie so they could sell the recipe. Sampling is wrong and, for good reason, illegal.
             Without regard to law I believe that sampling a previously recorded sound without compensation or permission does amount to stealing. I feel like sampling is something that should never be done because there are many more opportunities and avenues one can explore to get the same vibe from a song without stealing. Anytime you take someone else's music you are stealing, if you did not recreate that sound yourself. The Beastie Boys have been known for their sampling, but in recent years have gone against it and actually use their own instruments and sounds to rerecord anything they wish to sample. That fully absolved them of any blame and it makes it morally correct.
             It should not matter that only a slight amount of material is used for the new composition. Copyright laws make that very clear and that is the correct assumption. You should never be able to steal anything even if it's only a fraction of a second. You could use 200 milliseconds of James Brown's voice and I could identify it immediately therefore NO sampling without permission should be legal. You can always get permission if you go about the correct measure and if you can't there are other avenues that you can explore, because that's the way copyright law is written. Parody is making fun of a song using the same composition, not recording. I personally think parody is great because it doesn't make use of the original recording and allows a hilarious take on the original song. Usually those parodies turn out to be better than the real thing in my opinion. The "Fat" parody of "Bad" by Wei...