I just kind of checked out the whole deal of what's going on here, and not to be blunt, but you are massively out of your depth and slinging accusations about things you do not understand whatsoever. The artist you're trying to claim is a ripoff is using samples and loops from Music Maker soundpools. The service you have used to find the artists he "ripped off" has in reality found other songs that used the same samples and/or loops. 100% of this is completely legal. This is equivalent to calling someone a thief and a hack because he and another artist used the same snare sound. I myself have made (though never released) a track with that same Stand My Style acapella you're trying to claim this Knight guy stole from this Strucki guy. It's all publicly usable. You can use it if you buy the soundpool package.

Gonna be honest, when you saw that Knight had a song with the exact same acapella as Strucki, despite Strucki's acapella not being available and Knight's song clearly not being an acapella rip (the quality can attest to that), you should have guessed something was up that you didn't understand. When you saw that Knight credited the track vocals to MAGIX, and you first guessed that it was some nonexistent artist Knight made up (why?) and credited (why? wasn't the accusation just that he was taking credit for work that wasn't his?), and then found that this company, this DAW, and this community existed, you should have guessed something was up that you didn't understand.

I've watched your videos, and they don't make any sense. You encounter several logical roadblocks that should stop anyone in their tracks, but you didn't even notice them. You're trying to claim Knight pretended to make a beat with someone else's vocals when in reality he stole it from Strucki - but the only similarity between those two songs is the vocal, the beat is entirely different.You repeatedly insist that he give credit to the person who made the beat, but you found no beat theft - just the same acapella over two different beats.

What's weird is this Knight guy obviously tried to clarify to you several times that he was using samples that were the same as other people, yet you dismissed it out of hand and continued to claim it's theft - why? It's not like his defenses were unfounded, as that is exactly what he was doing and any research would have uncovered this. You rebuke the things he says with no reason to. "This isn't a f-ing sample, c-. This is taking his credit. You're stealing his credit." That's a quote from your own video. There are several quotes exactly like it. Why say this? Why are you so devotedly against the possibility that Knight is using samples?

Piano loops are samples. Acapellas are samples. "Tiny bits put together" is not the definition of samples. One-shots are not the only type of sample, and it's not anyone else who's got it wrong. "Don't claim this is loops, either." It is! Are you somehow not aware that a large part of sampling as well as the entire origin of the practice is/was sampling entire songs from other people? The earliest samples were done illegally, too, without permission or credit, so this practice you seem to be so devoted to the purity of conflicts with what seem to be your hardline values.

You end your video by playing the entirety of Strucki's track, with no edits or changes or anything. There's not even anything other than a black screen. You've committed more theft by doing that than Knight has done in this whole debacle. I suggest you make an apology video.

And why is there so much reverb on your voice?

This clearly shows how broken the current copyright system is. Youtube doesn't even allow monetization for sample- and loop-heavy music genres anymore because of all these false claims.

This best way is to make original music yourself and use samples and loops only to get inspired or to create demos that will never be published.

I think its a bit more than being loop heavy, check this video

I get what your saying nothing but terrors, maybe these people have used the same loops, or maybe hes copied these tracks outright, check the last video I have posted, and let me know what you think

Saying its like calling someone a theif because they have used the same snare sound? you have to be joking here

but the only similarity between those two songs is the vocal, the beat is entirely different.You repeatedly insist that he give credit to the person who made the beat, but you found no beat theft - just the same acapella over two different beats.) lol cmon man you can play both tracks at the exact same time and yo cant tell if ones been turned off the even the tempo is identical

What's weird is this Knight guy obviously tried to clarify to you several times that he was using samples that were the same as other people, yet you dismissed it out of hand and continued to claim it's theft - why?) watch the second video,

You rebuke the things he says with no reason to. "This isn't a f-ing sample, c-. This is taking his credit. You're stealing his credit." Ok so even if he didn't steal it which I think he did, lets say he used loops, when someone says I love the way yo put this beat together and the way you played the keyboard here is great,,and he says thank you, isn't that taking credit for something he hasn't actually done,,i can can a bunch of loops and put them together if someone says wow I loved the way you played that guitar and I say thanks, but its a sample shouldn't I say its a sample? or should I just take credit for playing the licks when I havnt actually played them? seems a bit dishonest to me, with this mentality I can just sample a bunch of steve vai guitar solos and take credit for playing them? If someone says to me wow great guitar playing and I just say thanks,,isn't that taking credit for steve vais work?

The earliest samples were done illegally, too, without permission or credit, so this practice you seem to be so devoted to the purity of conflicts with what seem to be your hardline values.)

do you honestly think this practice should be encouraged?

You end your video by playing the entirety of Strucki's track, with no edits or changes or anything. There's not even anything other than a black screen. You've committed more theft by doing that than Knight has done in this whole debacle. I suggest you make an apology video.

And why is there so much reverb on your voice?

Atleast i gave the actual artist credit, now i know he also used loops from Magix I would of said with struck using loops from Magix, reverb on the voice I didn't care mic was plug into a pedal with a guitar setting

Ill put together a track using only loops from studio one 4,,ill run it through sondhound, how much do yo want to make a bet that it picks up nothing?

This best way is to make original music yourself and use samples and loops only to get inspired or to create demos that will never be published.))

SP ^^^^^^^^^Exactly!!

lol cmon man you can play both tracks at the exact same time and yo cant tell if ones been turned off the even the tempo is identical

This is because the loops in question come with a suggested tempo, which is the tempo they were recorded at.

watch the second video,

I did watch the second video. I quote it directly.

Ok so even if he didn't steal it which I think he did, lets say he used loops, when someone says I love the way yo put this beat together and the way you played the keyboard here is great,,and he says thank you, isn't that taking credit for something he hasn't actually done,,i can can a bunch of loops and put them together if someone says wow I loved the way you played that guitar and I say thanks, but its a sample shouldn't I say its a sample? or should I just take credit for playing the licks when I havnt actually played them? seems a bit dishonest to me, with this mentality I can just sample a bunch of steve vai guitar solos and take credit for playing them? If someone says to me wow great guitar playing and I just say thanks,,isn't that taking credit for steve vais work?

Correct. When someone says "good transitions", however, and he says "thank you", this is taking credit for his own work, as transitions are something you create while arranging. Back when I was just making songs using loops from MAGIX, I also had to create transitions. When someone says "good beat", it is not scammy or wrong to accept thanks, even if you used loops to create the beat. This, if you'll notice, is what happened.

It does not matter whether or not you think he stole it, the facts are the facts. I've already explained to you exactly what happened.

do you honestly think this practice should be encouraged?

I'm not talking about my own opinions here. I'm talking about yours.

Atleast i gave the actual artist credit, now i know he also used loops from Magix I would of said with struck using loops from Magix

I don't know how to explain this to you if you don't understand already, but there is no "actual artist" that needs credit given. Both Knight and Strucki have done the exact same thing, entirely independent of each other, neither one building off another. Both Knight and Strucki have the exact same amount of originality here. Knight did not know about Strucki prior to this fiasco, nor the other way around.

As I've said, I myself made a track using that acapella years ago. If I released it, I wouldn't be copying Strucki and would not need to give Strucki any credit. I didn't even know Strucki existed until this post you made.

Ill put together a track using only loops from studio one 4,,ill run it through sondhound, how much do yo want to make a bet that it picks up nothing?

If someone else has made a song with the same loop and put it on streaming services, SoundHound may just pick it up! I've had several of my songs from my early mixtape days be wrongly claimed on YouTube by automatic copyright services as different songs from people I've never heard of before, all because we used the same loop or acapella. Your line of thinking and video production would have me painted as a thief of content from "actual artists" I've never heard of who were no more or less original than myself. This happens. You are wrong.