Talk:Timbaland

Proposals

Proposition #1: Move section IRC evidence and initial discovery of theft DISCUSSION to 2007 Timbaland plagiarism controversy ARTICLE. Ishmael Rufus 00:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree -- Ishmael Rufus 00:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

General Discussion

Isn't timbaland the guy in cry me a river from cry me a river, the guy in the car?--60.226.31.60 05:55, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes. --FuriousFreddy 08:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Add Thief to his CV

How about adding this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4KX7SkDe4Q

Why can we not comment on the plagiarism by Timbaland on this page? It is clear after having seen the above video that Timbaland did screw things up...

And, check this link, where they prove that Timbaland actually sold the stolen file as a ringtone for his own use: http://www.side-line.com/news_comments.php?id=20102_0_2_0_C

LOL, No. Ishmael Rufus 00:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

slated to work with muse !?

does anybody know the source of this citation ?

Assist me with Project, please!

I am seeking the most greatest feat all DJs have never attempted before! The ULTIMATE TIMBALAND RE-MIX. I hope this article can assist me with finding all of the songs I need to complete my quest. This is why I would like to see all the songs Timbaland has ever produced! Please help me! --Sakamura

timbaland african?

Isn't timbaland half indian, that's why he has a lot of India-style bhangra influenced beats, i think he said in one of his songs, "I'm black with Indian..."

Magoo said that, not Timbaland...and he meant Native American. --FuriousFreddy 02:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Timbaland is a legend!!!! <3#

Kaiser Sensei?

Does anyone know what Timbaland is referring to when he calls himself Kaiser Sensei in the intro to "Pony"?

answer: "kaiser sosoe" is popular figure popularized by the mid-90's movie "the usual suspects" used as an alias for timbalands behind the scenes production. [cisco at cysk001@mac.com/] send me a message to start and join the timbaland group!!

picture caption

The caption for the picture with Timbaland and Magoo doesn't specify which one is Timbaland. The caption should be changed to begin with something like "Timbaland (right) & Magoo on the cover..." kaiser sosoe is a codename based on a popular character timbaland uses as a production alias.(cisco at cysk001@mac.com/

Timbaland's Style

The interesting thing about Timbaland is his style of music and rythm. You can always recognize a Timbaland heavy beat in any song. Not too diverse but still very catchy and unique....

Timbal ?

Timbal is ancient african instrument. The brazilian group Timbalada uses heavily it.

how many songs??

how many songs has timbaland produced? should this be referenced?

I believe so. There's quite a bit of Songs missing from the list: Wonder'bout and Let Me give you my love are a few. --Sakamura

Dear editor

Good morning, I suggest this, for the article. The information need to be commplied with an Celebrity Infobox, and another things. Wherever, needs to be reorganized for be a complete wiki-article. Thank you.

Good Bye

New Compilation Album?

I've heard that a movie about Missy Elliott's life is being made. I wonder if this new compilation album Timbaland is working on could be the soundtrack for the movie? something similar to Tim's Bio: From the Motion Picture: Life From Da Bassment?

Justin Timberlake said that he is writting hooks for Timbaland's upcoming album in a recent interview on Jimmy Kimmel Live.

Can we get a photo?

Huge article, but no photo?

Here you go.. http://www.pelulamu.net/timbaland/timbaland_c64.jpg --Signed: the anonymous coward (there, happy?)

Controversy

An IP user posted this which is wrong in so many ways as Digg is not a news site like that, at all. However, this is the forum the digg post pointed to which is also VERY wrong, forums are bad, very bad, for this. Now I don't know this Timbaland dude because I hate rap/hip-hop, (I am more of a Megadeath and Metallica fan). But posting possibly inaccurate information is wrong for Wikipedia. If there is someone who cares about Timbaland they can fine a real source to back this controversy up, until then do not post possible false information.--WhereAmI 00:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

There are plenty of articles that link to news website for validation of facts on wikipedia. Furthermore These are plain facts listed in here. Listen to the audio clips. This is not "made up" information. Your point of view is wrong this time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.253.98.227 (talk • contribs)

No, Digg is not a source in this type. The actual Digg article does not have these audio clips. Watch me change this to the FORUM that has the information. Learn to use Digg and howto cite things.--WhereAmI 04:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like User talk:Discospinster is smart here. Forums and Digg are not sources in this matter. IP addresses, please stop changing and using the Digg article as sources. If you find MTV, I and I amd sure Disco will be very happy with that source.--WhereAmI 04:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Even if news items or websites are not sufficient reference or source, shouldn't the mp3s be sufficient sources/references on their own. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.238.74.76 (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

I already gathered a bunch of links at Loose (album) already (in between them a youtube video with direct comparison of the tracks), and I disagree that forums aren't referential in this case: In the case of Dane Cook's stolen joke controversy, a forum post was enough by Louis CK to state that yes the jokes are ripped but no he wishes not to pursue legal action? Considering that we'll hardly hear a response from the producer itself but the "defendant" in this case cannot hold a press conference because he's just a hobby musician, forum posts including direct comparisons and samples should be a verifiable source, as they contain material to allow verification of the claims. // Gargaj 14:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Also; I think it should be worth mentioning that the original song i question can be downloaded from Scene.org, the most reputable demoscene archive in existence, properly timestamped in the year 2000. (post by Gloom, not a WikiPedia-user :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.48.116.158 (talk) 14:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

I have heard the mp3s and I understand whats going on, but FIRST OF ALL DIGG LINKS TO SOMETHING AWFUL, DIGG IS NOT A SOURCE, SOMETHING AWFUL IS THE SOURCE GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS. You may say popularized by Digg.com and link to Digg.coms main page, or the wiki article of Digg. Now, the Something Awful thing it says this: "Timbaland ripped off a track from my buddy." Here's the deal: Neither Timbaland NOR the original artist have commented on this in any form that you users have supplied to Wikipedia. Alrgiht? Following me? There are NO reputable sources yet. IP users: When you find one, send it to me User_talk:WhereAmI and I will incorporate it if I find it reliable. Here is the Youtube link that shows comparison. Listen everyone, I need a news article not from DIGG as DIGG IS NOT A COMMON NEWS SITE IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE. Search Google News and find something, but SA, Digg, and Youtube vids are not sources. Why do you think this page is locked? Because NONE ARE RELIABLE SOURCES.--WhereAmI 23:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you need a hug. (Yes, I understand what you're saying (without the caps too), I agree on some points, I'm just a bit bothered when someone treats me like a 13 year old AOL-er. And yes, we can agree on Megadeth.) // Gargaj 15:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I would like to point out, I do not care if the reliable source relies on the links you have provided. So what can you do? E-mail someone that can take care of this such as MTV (who won't do anything), VH1, Fuse, LastFM, MANY more, but Wikipedia does not make news, it is an online encyclopedia.--WhereAmI 23:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, we should mention this if and only if some news outlet runs a story on it that we can cite. --Delirium 04:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Though this controversy has yet to fully form, wouldn't it be encyclopedic, at least for now, to cite primary sources and replace them with secondary sources as those come into being? I agree wikipedia is not a platform for gonzo journalism, but considering the soundness of the source material comparison, would this really be anything more than the same kind of research involved in the compilation of offline encyclopedias? -- DaoKaioshin 04:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: Here is a secondary source [[1]] as retrieved here [[2]] -- DaoKaioshin 05:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

That's just a journalist's blog. Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. —Dgies^t c 05:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not this is true, we must still follow Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons, verifiability and no original research. If you want to include as a primary source the guy making the allegation, then it must be verifiable that he made the allegation. That means you need his real name and the allegation must be published in some form, whether that is a news outlet, press release picked up by a wire service, or a legal filing. Failing that, we need a verifiable secondary source, such as a real news article, not some blog or Digg link. —Dgies^t c 05:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes artists only deserve credit for there work if someone cares about it. Rucklupfet 04:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

And I only care about relating it into Wikipedia if the original artist has a statement. Why hasn't that came to life yet? Anyway, I was considering this source that DaoKaioshin posted. It says the origional artist made a statement on this. Please find this source, then incorporate it. I see a very reliable source in the near future popping up, email them and get their attention.--WhereAmI 06:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I have contacted some of the relevant Sun-Times staff in Chicago and I suggest that since Wikipedia is so insistent (perhaps even dogmatic) on its definition of reputability in sources, it is up to those interested in seeing this issue addressed to create them. So email anyone and everyone because the only obstacle to reliability is getting something mentioned on the right domain. -- DaoKaioshin 07:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention. Local outlets will publish almost anything. -- DaoKaioshin 07:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

the wiki needs to be updated to reflect this, neutrally though.Preeeemo 06:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Once we have a reliable, verifiable source, certainly. Until then, WP:BLP says don't publish defamatory rumors about people. —Dgies^t c 06:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This is as reliable and verifiable as it gets:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4KX7SkDe4Q — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebeeson (talk • contribs)

• This was not my comment! - Whether due to malice or poor understanding of MediaWiki, this edit by User:Ebeeson made the above comment look like it was signed by me and not him. —Dgies^t c 16:24, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, except it's on YouTube (i.e., open website anyone can post to with absolutely no quality control whatsoever), which is quite frowned upon already. It's not that I disagree with the findings or anything - personally, I'd wait until this escalates to the point that mainstream media takes note - and it will. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know.. if you want evidence, actual video evidence is pretty much the best sort. The location of such evidence isn't really important. If a news article in a more mainstream audience pointed directly to that YouTube clip, rather than hosting it themselves, would it still be "frowned upon"? If this doesn't get into the mainstream news, it's still plagiarism, and he shouldn't get away with it just because some large news companies decided it wasn't worth reporting. Totally unbiased, me, of course. ;) Korinkami 12:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, this is one of those discussions that, due to their nature, defy all "ordinary" logic. Think of it this way: You have a website that says "the sky is blue". No one's contesting the fact, obviously. It's truth. Yet you can't use that as a source; that's a weak fact, you have no way of saying how it relates to the big picture. Remember, the truth is always more complicated than just a statement of facts. (Yes, the sky is blue; why is it blue? Did the Flying Spaghetti Monster paint it blue, or maybe it has something to do with the fact that the rest of the universe is actually blue, maybe?). Then, later, comes another website, by a famous astronomer, who explains exactly why the sky is blue, with references to a bunch of other astronomers and meteorologists and physicists who concur with the findings because they've verified it themselves. Think of it this way: Who do you rather listen to for the fact, the guy who can just say the sky is blue, or the scientist who knows exactly why it is blue? Both know the simple fact that the sky is blue, yet only one is worth listening for - the other guy won't add anything to what we already know. You can get the fact anywhere. You can get the verification and details only through rigorous research.
The problem with this video is that it just shows "hey, there's very damn clear similarities and everyone can hear that, right?". However, you can't draw just one specific conclusion based on these facts - as they stand, they're just allegations. This source relies on us to draw conclusions. And we do not draw conclusions here.
A journalist would report "Hmm, this seems clear, we investigated this further and here's the results, the guy replied this way when we asked an inconvenient question." A court would say "Okay, we hear the matter" and years later "Okay, this is what we say is the final truth on this matter." --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 13:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Hm, but if that is the case, could we not simply note the similarity as trivia since it is a fact not immediately intuitive or widely known, so long as we hold judgment and interpretation, stating merely fact? From what I understand, it's simply a matter of needing someone to have lawyered up well enough to be afford some degree of protection of this edit, legally. -- 68.249.204.118 15:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but there we go again: What possible reason would we have to mention that a potential crime of copyright infringement has occurred? Since we're on the business of referring to random YouTube videos, here's another one (I'm claiming Fair Use since it's relevant to the discussion =) this is exactly like what's quoted there: "I'm not saying they're illegally ripping off compositions! I'm just wondering out loud why this song sounds so stunningly similar..." That's the problem that these sources have: since no background checks have been made, yet, you can just put a Random Fact out there and use it to potentially black-paint people. And even if you believe the information is benign ("No, it's not a copyright infringement, there's always been an amicable relationship between the two composers and they're legally borrowing each other"), we can always start to question why it's relevant in the first place - why is it interesting that the songs are similar? ("I could swear this bird chirped the national anthem this morning, I guess I'll add this curious event to Wikipedia.") But I agree to this to the extent that it's only a matter of trustworthiness of the source where we get this information: Right now we have random blog/forum posts. What we need is someone with a face, a throughout website and mountains of evidence that this is really true and verifiable. (A cynical answer: Someone who's going to be spectacularly sued for libel in the unlikely event this mountain of evidence is flawed.) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how these are mere allegations when "Do It" uses for its' backing a 15-second sample from the SID, looped over and over. In this case, it's not a matter of "this sounds really close to another song". --LocalH 16:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The point here is that until something happens, this is not a solid fact. What it is is that it it's ammunition for a likely successful copyright infringement lawsuit. Until that happens, we should treat it as a recently defused time bomb that has been planted on plain sight on an airport: Yes, everyone knows it's there, but no one wants to be around until the bomb squad gets it the hell out of there. In either case, the reporters won't like to leave cliffhangers around. "There's a bomb on the airport. Will the bomb squad robot survive?" --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Citing Slashdot

The previous discussion regarding the controversy touched upon the fact that early sites reporting this were not citable as reliable sources. However, the online news site Slashdot is citable, and now that they have mentioned this controversy it may be referenced in the article. Note that we cannot speculate as to whether Timbaland DID or DID NOT copy this melody, but we can only summarize what has been reported in reliable sources like Slashdot. - O^O 17:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, YLE (or Yleisradio; that is Finland's National Broadcasting Company), which I would consider a reliable source has a short story on this in their website. http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/kulttuuri/vasen/id51183.html - not a wikipedia user, sorry if I didn't follow the protocol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.217.46.155 (talk • contribs)

Slashdot is not a reliable source as all they are doing here is a "rumor" post. Slashdot is full of them, just like Digg. The Finnish website takes a little more investigation, and until that is done it will stay temporarily.--WhereAmI 20:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

In this case, Slashdot is a reliable source. They are reporting that the controversy exists. We can cite slashdot as stating that this controversy has emerged, but we cannot post our own analysis of the controversy. - O^O 22:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Slashdot would be reliable to say "People are talking about this". However, WP:BLP says that if you are publishing allegations against a living person, you must have a reliable source for the allegation itself, not merely that someone is repeating it. —Dgies^t c 23:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The YLE site does seem to cover the Facts As We Know adequately. However, it's a bit careful and doesn't have many details yet; it basically says similarities are extremely noticeable and there's been a lot of debate (pro and con) about it on the web. (Fascinating how fast they reacted, however. =) However, I guess it satisfies reliable source requirement, as it is mainstream media and all. I would personally still be a bit hesitant to do anything based on that source alone... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 21:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the origional artist needs to say something. How do we know he didn't give Timbaland permission? We don't. Get an article on his take on the subject. These sites that think "omg, this youtube video shows it it is so obvious" are jumping to conclusions. My final take here is: Get the original artists take on this subject, or don't bother at all. I am calling a neutral part.--WhereAmI 22:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so what's the problem here? I don't think you can cite Slashdot, but "yle.fi" is most definitely citable. {Slash | Talk} 22:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The Finnish website needs a translation. It sources the Youtube and Digg, but I and others have no idea if it is as reliable as slashdot or not.--WhereAmI 22:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm from Finland, so here's (rough, my English isn't super good) translation so it can be considered a reliable source. "An American hip hop producer Timbaland is accused of plagiarizing a Finnish musician. Timbaland, who has produced hits for Jay-z, Missy Elliot, Aaliyah and others, is accused of plagiarizing a Finnish track. Finnish Tempest aka Janne Suni composed in the year 2000 in Assembly a track called Acid Jazzed Evening which Timbaland has obviously heard. Resemblance between his Nelly Furtados' track 'Do it' seem obvious. The resemblance has cause a wide discussion on the open internet news sites and also youtube. The composer of the original track, Suni, has been urged to take legal actions, but on the other hand sampling or utilizing other tracks has also been defended. Tempest has also participated discussion in the Digg news site. He made the track with Amiga and won oldskool-compo in Assembly."--Fuzzybyte 22:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:V and WP:REF say that English Language sources are preferred, but not required. They also say we can use our own English translation, as long as we also clearly cite the original. - O^O 22:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

There is still no official communt from "Janne Suni" on this subject. Find that.--WhereAmI 22:24, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here we go again. He was accused, by who? Who accused him?--WhereAmI 22:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

A poster claiming to be Tempest (Janne Suni) wrote more about this here: [3] - O^O 23:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Slashdot is not a reliable source. But the Finnish Broadcasting Company probably is. I have rewritten the paragraph to reflect with they have published. —Dgies^t c 23:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Slashdot and the Finnish Broadcasting company are equally reliable sources in this case. However, I have no objection to deleting one source so long as the other remains. - O^O 23:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Slashdot is not a source. Finnish Broadcasting is. I still prefer an official statement from Suni or Timbalands lawyers.--WhereAmI 23:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

It's "YLEISRADIO" ('common radio', radio for the people, for the public, for the common consuming of Finnish citizens), NOT "Finnish Broadcasting Company", for God's sake.. I wondered what they meant by it. --84.249.253.201 00:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, YLE has self-designated itself FBC, Finnish Broadcasting Company in English (see their own website [4]]). "Common Radio" doesn't really work all that well when translated... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

WhereAmI - I don't understand your issues here. This is now reported from several official large magazines - clearly documented in the references on the "controversy" page linked to from this page. All your comments are in error. You might not be fluent in Norwegian, Finnish or German, but one of the finnish magazines has an extensive summary in English.

IRC evidence and initial discovery of theft

From IRCnet channel #C-64, hempest = Tempest aka Janne Suni

Sunday, 06 August 2006 12:40:00 EET - <rambones> so did you sue Nelly F ?
Sunday, 06 August 2006 12:40:11 EET - <hempest> working on it =)
Sunday, 06 August 2006 12:40:38 EET - <hempest> rambones: wheels started rolling a week ago

Potential theft was noted on #C-64 as early as July 10, 2006 and it was verified --

Tuesday, 11 July 2006 17:27:37 EET - <Jeff_VRZ> aha.... it's a a cover of a tempest mod — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

Where was this information received? And if it has been that long, there must be documents somewhere.--WhereAmI 22:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Well duh, isn't it obvious? It was caught on my IRC log and now that this thing surfaced, I recalled Tempest and GRG are semi-regulars and that there had been some talk about some Furtado song ripped melody or something. Hence, I did a keyword search. Well, I found quite a lot of conversation relating to this theft thing particularly during 10th to 13th of July 2006 on that channel. What's said on that channel usually stays on that channel, so I'm not surprised this data hasn't surfaced before this. I assure you, those are verbatim unedited log entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

Even if they are verbatim IRC logs, that is not a reliable source per Wikipedia's standards. —Dgies^t c 22:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

That's not how I see it like. See reliable source guidelines, under Types of source material/primary source. It doesn't get much closer to eyewitness account than this, and I would classify myself as observer of event. But I bet that if Tempest himself showed up to comment on this talk page, somebody would dismiss it as unreliable source and would demand someone runs it through a news agency or something :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

Coming through you makes it third-hand, without any way of verifying that Tempest actually wrote it, and therefore it can't be used. You are correct that if Tempest himself posted here (or better yet, on his personal website) there are many who would resist citing it. - O^O 23:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to join IRCnet #C-64 (irc.stealth.net should do it) and ask if somebody has channel logs from last July. It's not like I was the only one around to see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

Yes, I do demand he runs it through a news agency. The IRC chat log is very unreliable. Where is Suni's official webpage where they can make a statement?--WhereAmI 23:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

First you demand a legitimate source. That's fair. Once that's provided, you begin to insist on a statement from the original musician before considering changing your stance? If you're going to be a stickler for the rules, at least be consistent with your demands.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.200.21 (talk • contribs)

There is a legitimate source, the Finnish site now. Nothing else was good enough. Then, one of my main points is Suni still has not made an offical statement, so all that is happening right now is Wikipedia is spreading a rumor. I will be watching his webpage for a statement as the user below has posted his webpage.--WhereAmI 00:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Janne Suni's webpage is http://www.fairlight.fi/tempest/, but it has no statement (as of yet, at least. And apparently his digg comments won't do?). 213.130.254.133 23:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

No, Digg comments will not do. It is easy for someone to make up a Digg account with Tempest in the name. Now, if you look at the Tempest account in the Digg area, it was created just for that post. Non-reliable source. On a side note, find my comment in the Digg link by hitting Ctrl+F and typing WhereAmI. Thats right.--WhereAmI 23:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but do you have megalomanic tendences or something? It's just.. You're really being inconsistent and pretty darn hard-core about controlling this page. --unsigned — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.116.158 (talk • contribs)

Because the IP addresses kept posting rumors. Then there was a debate on certain sources being verifiable. Wikipedia is not about rumors. I choose to ignore every IP comment from now on on this subject.--WhereAmI 00:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[5] [6] Direct links to Janne's digg comments above. I believe they are genuine (username tempestflt should be proof enough - any faker would've been "jannesuni" or "tempest" but not many are aware of flt membership, nor the abbreviation), but please read the comments and judge for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

No.--WhereAmI 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

They may well be his, and they may be true. But a Digg posting is not a reliable source because there is no identity verification. —Dgies^t c 00:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Here is his Digg account. Why don't you make a Wikipedia account with Tempest in the name? According to your logic, that is just as believable.--WhereAmI 00:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh, hello? I was agreeing with you that there's no verifiability in a Digg (or Wikipedia) username. —Dgies^t c 04:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That was an agreement and furthermore on your point.--WhereAmI 05:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Then, my friends, I would say Wikipedia has a fundamental flaw in its thinking. You guys expect everything to have conclusive real-world validation and proof just like any other real-world news item; well guess what, this event is strictly internet based for the time being, Tempest's original song was released on the internet, he communicates exclusively through internet etc. - I just don't see him holding a press conference over this matter, and how could he even do that? Reporters are being invited to a press conference by a total nobody, guess how many of them will show up? Zero? One? Who's to say he is who he says he is? Do reporters demand to see ID's? No, they'll take his word for it. Now, how is it any different for internet? Somebody shows up somewhere, introduces himself as someone, you either buy it or you don't buy it. It's as simple as that. Nothing on internet cannot possibly have absolutely 100% verifiable identity checks and balances in place. Wikipedia is essentially a collection of small snippets of information contributed by numerous internet users, but who's to trust them? Their identity is not known in absolute terms, nor can we be sure if they're telling us the truth or bullshitting us. Such is the way of things. This Tempest/Timbaland case is crystal clear to anyone who bothers to do some fact-checking; Tempest's tune is up on scene.org as of 2000 and Furtado's album isn't a rare commodity either. Listen. Compare. Learn. Oh, and obviously you cannot trust the audio clips that you can download from the internet, somebody could've tampered with them! If you have such a distrust regarding anything that exists exclusively in form of zeros and ones, I suggest you re-think your involvement in project such as Wikipedia in the first place. Oh, and I would never ever pose as Tempest myself, this demoscene community of ours has - after all - some rather rigid (although unwritten) rules and dignity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

This is why I am glad the page is semi-locked. Wikipedia does not make these conclusions. You can make whatever conclusions you want. But try making an article entitled "Timbaland Controversy" with information. It will probably get nominated for speedy deletion, and a whole bunch of Wikipedia users shall read and say: "What controversy? Because the songs sound similiar? What? The origional artist has not made a statement yet nor is suing? Then there is no controversy, as neither party cares. It is just some random internet rumor that is not news."--WhereAmI 00:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

At this point, whole "Timbaland Controversy" has reached the kind of proportions we can no longer speak of an "internet rumor", it's more like "internet phenomenon" or "internet-based grassroot movement" by now. Is it official Wikipedia policy now that if something isn't dragged to court by someone, it cannot by any means be factual? Here I was, thinking that Wikipedia deals with Facts, and I can definitely see many undisputable facts in this "Timbaland Controversy". I cannot by any means be the only one. Why don't we search and delete any articles or references to any and all "internet fads" or "internet phenomenons" (such as All Your Base Are Belong To Us was) from Wikipedia, for clearly they were a figment of our collective consciousnesses imagination :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.171.244 (talk • contribs)

---

At this point, based on the available evidence seen both here and elsewhere, there is a growing index of suspicion against Timbaland and crew. Naturally, if this story continues to blossom, Timbaland, Furtado, and friends, will have to address this issue, and hopefully in a way that is positive and constructive to all parties.

Assuming Geffen executives, Timbaland or Furtado people read Wikipedia: Please keep this in mind from one of your fans -> IF this turns out to be a case of blatant plagiarism and IF the victimized artists are not duly compensated for their work, I can definitely guarantee that no one in my circle of friends and associates, and their associates in kind, will be purchasing or recommending any products by any enterprise party to such despicable behavior, including (but not limited to) Geffen Records, Timbaland, and Ms. Furtado. Rest assured, this sentiment is likely to be widespread amongst former fans and damaging to the bottom line, IF any of the previous suppositions hold.

Additionally, it is interesting to note that after all these years, C-64 and Amiga -apparently- still make "noise" .. both for music and for news. --- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.34.98.154 (talk • contribs)

--- Here's proof that Tempest wrote it:

ftp://ftp.scene.org/pub/parties/2000/assembly00/results.txt (top of "Oldskool music")

That's the official site of the competition where he entered it. About 3000 people attended that competition. You can download the original song from the same site (not fairlight, ASSEMLBY). It's still running. Isn't the official site of a major annual international event enough evidence? It's not going to move next week.

So, we have:

• Proof that Tempest wrote "acid jazzed"
• Almost indestinguishable sound

Why do we need a major news corporation to write about this small time artist to verify it when the evidence is so clear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.80.219 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia does not make these conclusions.--WhereAmI 00:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

But major news corporations do? I don't see how one is more authoritative than the other.

Is WhereAmI an authority of wikipedia, or a timbalake fan/employee? Which conclusion do you not make? That Tempest wrote "acid jazzed"? How can we prove this to you? Incidentally, Tempest has received legal papers from scene.org confirming the date of upload of the file. Would that be sufficient? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.28.8.147 (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

I am WhereAmI, wikipedia user. Crap sources are crap, shit, and nothing more. The legal files are great resources, please post them. Further down I see "Suni" has made a statement on his official webpage. This too is a good source. Youtube, slashdot, Digg, and your little forums are SHIT FOR SOURCES. Deal with it. No, I am no fanboy. In fact, I am a hater. I do not believe there is one song in his discography I care for, and I despise most of them as talentless shit talk.--WhereAmI 18:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please everyone, stay calm and assume good faith! The mods are not against Tempest or you, it's strictly "business" or protocol, not personal. 83.102.36.42 01:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Tempest has now made a public statement about never having given up the copyrights to his song, check his webpage at http://www.fairlight.fi/tempest/ --anonymous coward

Unfortunately, he still has not made a statement.--WhereAmI 19:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

"I have never given up the copyrights of Acidjazzed Evening. I also have never authorized commercial use of the song. In 2002, however, Glenn Rune Gallefoss (also known as GRG) made a conversion/arrangement of the Acidjazzed Evening which was not released commercially. This arrangement was made on the Commodore 64 computer. It was authorized by me, and Glenn Rune Gallefoss explicitly asked for permission before releasing the arrangement."

[7]213.130.254.133 20:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice, I or someone may or may not put that in soon.--WhereAmI 20:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Timbaland has also been accused of stealing the same song for usage as a ringtone. See Side-Line as well as this new, additional, norwegian source: [8] TERdON 19:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

NPOV controversy

A completely neutral, referenced statement regarding the so called plagiarism has been added. It should not be expanded unless reliable references are provided. If and when Timbaland makes an official statement regarding this controversy it should be added, and any disputed facts corrected.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 08:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

So as long as he doesn't live up to it, it can go down in history as never having existed? 85.81.127.21 12:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

No. So long as there are not enough reliable sources provided Ishmael Rufus 00:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Timbachick latest edits

As you can see in the history, user Timbachick seems dead set to remove the Plagiarism controversy paragraph. What are the circumstances for an user/ip ban? On a sidenote, if her claims are true and she IS an intern for Timbaland, would that mean that THIS is an official action by Timbaland? Could it be that Timbaland is actively removing information about all this?