Songs that make use of sampling should require royalties to the original artist, but only in certain circumstances. If the essence of the original song is still present in the new track, it would make sense that some royalty is due. However, if the sample that was used is not immediately recognizable in it's form in the new work, I don't think requiring a royalty is reasonable.
Yes they should get some of the royalties. The original artist did the work. Somebody coming along to "sample" it should have to pay the artist. If they don't want to share the money then create something new. Where is the originality in this world today? Sometime people have to think outside of the box.
For their material. Long before they got recorded, they worked hard at their skill on the instruments and vocal ability. After a lot more work, they got noticed for their talent and were signed to record. Even a short original song can take hundreds of hours just to write including the sheet music. Then they practice it for hours till they get it down. Finally, they spend more time in the studio and do several takes of the same song till they get it just right. How is it fair to them if someone with no real talent can just chop bits of their hard work up and claim ownership.
Yes, I believe artists should be required to pay royalties for "sampling" music. I think it is wrong to use parts of songs without permission from the artist who came up with them. Musicians work hard to write original music that no one has written before. For one musician to use another musician's work as their own is like stealing.
If you're sampling from another song that has already been published and out in the media for a long time, you need to be paying royalties to the original artist for it. It's basically stealing if you're just taking their work without their own permission. The original artists deserve it just as much as the new artists do.
No, artists should not be paid royalties for someone sampling a short piece of their music. Look at it like this: Does an author receive royalties every time someone picks up one of their books and reads the blurb on the back or the inside cover or even reads the first page or so? No, they certainly don't, and I'm sure a lot of people would think it was ridiculous if they did.