The way I see it, "influenced by" and "derived from" are the almost the same thing, but there is an important difference. Every human being is unique, and that means artists and musicians too. However, they're all still human, and they all fall into human patterns. One basic human pattern is to absorb and be influenced by what one sees. Monkey see, monkey do. All the great artists of the 20th century were influenced by somebody, and they created art which was somewhat derived from the art that came before them. However, what is unique and relevant about digital sampling is that it allows people to actually use actual pieces of the original copyrighted commercial art to create a new copyrighted commercial art. In this case, "derivative" is a completely appropriate description. This derivative art is something which copyright laws were enacted precisely to protect against. So, yes. Hip-hop and rave culture are based on a derivative art which was created and is apparently sustained through outlawism. Basically the video argues at the end that the potential commercial value of this kind of derivative outlawism outweighs the commercial value of the original copyright. I disagree. I think derivative outlawism in art leads to boring, derivative artistic culture. Why? In this case, the worldwide fascination with that six seconds of the Amen-break, recorded in 1969, has led to many years of derivative artistic navel gazing. Using the Amen break over and over and over and over and over again in modern recording is the artistic equivalent of replacing the world's library books with the Cliff's notes. It is ultimately artistically lazy, and leads to overindulgent, unlistenable crud. On a worldwide scale. Even the video's author seemed to agree on that point. Don't agree that derivative outlawism leads to boring, derivative artistic culture? Ever seen a graffiti artist that blew your mind with originality? I personally wish the lawyers had stepped in in the early eighties and shut this stuff down. If they had, we wouldn't currently be in the position of having to "dismiss the vast majority of human culture" as derivative. Why recording producers can't just hire a drummer is beyond me. Oh, right. According to the video, it was because it was cheaper and easier to make these sampled recordings for the club-scene. Basically, the artistic musical value received by the listener was thus reduced by sampling because the artist could 'sample it in the morning, press it in the afternoon, and give it to a DJ that night.' Imagine if the Beatles had recorded Sgt. Peppers in a day. It would have sucked. It would, by the nature of the time frame of its production, have been much more derivative. Fascinating video. Fascinating subject. Thank god for copyright laws, lawyers and big corporations. That derivative hip-hop explosion won't happen again. Whew.