Kelis Calls Beyoncé Fans ‘A Joke’ While Reacting To The ‘Renaissance’ Sample Being Removed: ‘I Won’

Beyoncé has herself a hit with Renaissance, but that didn’t stop her from making changes to the new album shortly after its release: She vowed to alter the lyric of “Heated” following backlash over an ableist slur, and after getting called out by Kelis, she removed a sample of Kelis’ “Milkshake” from “Energy.” Now that Kelis has gotten her way, she offered a reaction and she’s pretty pleased.

The comments of a recent Kelis Instagram post not related to the Beyoncé situation was full of comments about it and Kelis responded to a good amount of them over the past couple days. One user just noted the sample removal and Kelis responded, “yeah I won lol only a moron wouldn’t understand that.”

A fan congratulated Kelis and accused Beyoncé and her fans of having a “bullying energy about them.” Kelis responded, “thank you. You can’t be afraid to speak up for yourself no matter how big the bully’s. They are robots. I don’t care about any of them.”

Speaking of the Beyhive, Kelis didn’t mince words with or about them. One apparent Beyoncé fan commented, “Beyonce really tried to make you relevant again (since you haven’t been since the 90s or early 2000s) and you called her a ‘thief’?” Kelis replied, “I called out what it was . You are a mindless sheep. There I go again speaking truth. Lol I guess I just can’t help it lol.”

In other comments, she called the Beyhive “a joke” and said, “it’s got cult written all over it.”

Check out the post and some of the comments below.

Kelis Instagram comments Beyonce
@kelis/Instagram
Kelis Instagram comments Beyonce
@kelis/Instagram
Kelis Instagram comments Beyonce
@kelis/Instagram
Kelis Instagram comments Beyonce
@kelis/Instagram
Kelis Instagram comments Beyonce
@kelis/Instagram

What Made Beyonce Remove The Kelis Sample From ‘Energy?’

Sharp-eared fans who pressed play on Beyonce’s new album Renaissance today may have noticed that a couple of the songs sound slightly different than they did on Friday when it dropped. On one song, “Heated,” a line has been changed to replace a word described as a slur by disability activists, following up on similar actions taken by fellow star Lizzo when the same concerns were raised over her song “Grrrls.”

The other subtle but big change to Renaissance appears in the song “Energy.” Prior to the album’s release, “Milkshake” singer Kelis posted a video raising concerns with the song, which she had been informed would include a sample of one of her songs. Kelis believed that she was not credited and also felt that she deserved a heads-up call from either Beyonce or the song’s producers. It later turned out that while “Energy” does include interpolation of Kelis’ hit “Milkshake,” the songwriting was properly credited to Pharrell Williams and Chad Hugo, aka The Neptunes, who wrote and produced the original.

However, that didn’t stop fans from debating whether or not there was an uncredited sample of Kelis singing in “Energy,” so Beyonce apparently updated the song on DSPs to remove a vocal clip toward the end of the track. Industry veteran Naima Cochran, whom Uproxx interviewed about the dispute, believes that Beyonce did so to remove a distraction from the larger discussion she hoped to spark with Renaissance about the breadth and history of Black music, which includes pioneering dance music styles like house and techno in addition to hip-hop and R&B.

So, technically, Beyonce did NOT remove a sample of Kelis from “Energy” because there never was one in the first place. However, she did remove disputed vocals that some fans thought were similar enough to cause confusion. The interpolation of drums from Kelis’ single “Milkshake” remains, but it was properly credited to its original songwriters, The Neptunes. For more information, you can check out our interview with Naima, who brings 20+ years of music business experience with multiple music labels to her expert perspective.

Why Beyonce Didn’t Sample Kelis On ‘Renaissance’ And Doesn’t Owe Her Anything

By now, you are probably aware of Kelis’ ongoing grievance with Beyonce’s new album Renaissance, but if not, here’s a quick refresher. Last Thursday, Kelis posted a video relaying her resentment and dismay at learning that a song from the upcoming album, “Energy,” apparently used a sample (or interpolation, we’ll get into the differences later) of her song “Milkshake.” Kelis’ objected to Beyonce’s representatives neglecting to contact her for approval for using the snippet in “Energy.”

Of course, once the wider internet caught wind of Kelis’ complaints, a widescale donnybrook ensued that found fans taking sides between the two artists to argue whether Kelis deserved such a contact, Beyonce did anything wrong, or whether some other factor was to blame between the two. Even iconic songwriter Diane Warren weighed in to offer her own sorta shady take on songwriting, sampling, and how such things should be credited. Things came to a head when Beyonce removed elements of “Energy” from DSPs on Tuesday.

However, in all of the fuss, it seemed that more than anything else, fans were confused by the difference between what an interpolation and a sample are, let alone the mechanics of how songwriting credits are issued. Many folks still can’t tell where the interpolation appears in the song, despite her leaving the actual interpolation untouched. It all seems very complicated, so I reached out to an expert to help clear things up.

Naima Cochrane is an industry veteran with 20 years of experience working in entertainment law alongside the late, great Reggie Osse — aka Combat Jack — as well as a journalist who has written for major publications like Billboard, Mic, Vibe, and Vulture. Her Music Sermon Twitter lectures draw massive engagement from fans as she discusses the history and legacy of Black musical movements and culture-defining moments of the past three decades. She graciously agreed to a Zoom interview to sort out the terminology, backstory, and impact of this fraught situation, as well as whether Kelis has a point. “The whole thing is confusing for folks,” she says. Hopefully, this will help make it less so.

So, let’s just get to the root of what we think this dispute between Kelis and whoever she’s disputing with is about. She didn’t like that she wasn’t contacted for clearance for what she believed to be at the time to be a sample of her song “Milkshake” on Beyonce’s new album Renaissance.

Well, at first she didn’t think it was “Milkshake.” She got information about another track initially from a Beyonce fan site before the album came out. I think it was Beylegion who said that Beyonce was sampling. And that was prerelease.

And what she wound up using was an interpolation of drums from “Milkshake?”

Yeah, that kind of… That basic, kind of Neptunesish drum beat that’s under the track. The “la, la, las” were credited to… I know people are debating whether those were part of the sample or interpolation, but those should be credited to Teena Marie.

Okay, so why do we think that this turned Kelis off so much?

Well, I think it’s a couple things. I haven’t seen the original post that Kelis reacted to, but apparently, the first mention that Kelis saw used something like Beyonce was either collaborating with people including Kelis, or collaborating with Kelis, but there was something about collaboration. And also, like I said, they named a different track.

I think that that language triggered Kelis. She’s in a space. She recently lost her husband, which I’m going to acknowledge and dare to say if she’s already in that space of grieving, the perception of additional loss or especially unfair loss could possibly be a spark. But also, Kelis has been increasingly vocal lately about the fact that she feels Pharrell and Star Trak gave her a bum deal, specifically that she contributed more as a writer to the songs that she performs than she’s been given credit for and that Pharrell [cheated] her out of her publishing.

Is it not standard practice to contact someone when you want to sample or interpolate their work?

She made it seem as though it was standard practice in the music industry for an artist to contact a performer — and by performer, I mean the person who sang the song, even if they didn’t write and produce the song. Even if that person isn’t a publishing rights holder to just give a, quote, unquote, “heads up,” a courtesy heads up. In theory, I can see why people think this makes sense. In reality, if you understand how extensive the clearance process is for an album, you would understand why this is not realistic. This is not a practice that happens.

First of all, there’s two things that people don’t do: even when artists are getting clearance for samples from artists that they’re cool with, Beyonce did not call Pharrell and say, “I’m about to sample ‘Milkshake.’” That is not a conversation that happened. What happens is the lawyer contacts the other lawyer. That lawyer goes back to their client, “Beyonce has an interpolation on a song. She’s offering you this percentage. Are you cool? Yeah? No?” Boom.

The only time artists even contact artists directly when we’re talking about a sample or interpolation for clearance is when there’s a serious deference situation going on like maybe it’s a new artist and they’re worried that this other artist will pass and they really want to appeal to them directly, or when there’s some kind of impasse in the approval so they need to talk to each other to make an appeal. Maybe somebody wants to change some lyrics. For example, Stevie did that with Coolio, for “Gangsta’s Paradise.” He wouldn’t approve “Pastime Paradise” until Coolio changed some lyrics.

And as far as alerting Kelis, who I presume is not the publishing rights holder?

The second part is nobody calls people who aren’t copyright holders to say, “I’m using a song you performed on,” because what purpose does that serve? Because Kelis can’t get a check off of [something she’s not legally entitled to]. And this is the part where people are stuck. Because people are like, “Well, if she knows that Kelis is fighting Pharrell on her publishing, she could show support.” And that’s where I’m like, “Okay A, that presupposes that Beyonce agrees that Kelis has a case against Pharrell,” because Kelis never filed a piece of paper against Pharrell, Neptunes, or Star Trak.

B, though, more importantly, this would be Beyonce going on record as saying she supports the theory that Kelis has the standing in publishing a claim for this record. Beyonce can’t get Kelis paid for this record. That’s the thing that some people don’t seem to understand. No matter what Beyonce does, she can’t arbitrarily cut Kelis in on this record. She can’t. That’s not a thing. People seem to think, “Oh, if she put her name in the credits, Kelis is going to get paid.” No, she’s not ’cause Kelis is not an owner of the song. Period. So Beyonce credited her as a performer of the song. She did that on her website, which is different than a legal line.

300 credits on her website because her intention was to actually give the people who don’t usually show up in credits because they are not owners of the song or composition, lyrics or composition, give them a chance to actually be credited.

Yeah. Because of course, that would spark someone’s interest and they would discover someone and maybe go play their music and get them that streaming or a record sale or something.

Exactly. It’s a discovery thing. Ms. Tina [Knowles, Beyonce’s mother] said she really was conscious of trying to make sure people who maybe don’t always get a look, got the look. She credited Clark Sisters on “Church Girl.” She credited Robin S. on “Break My Soul.” So the thing about the conversation is that then it took this really weird turn that all things Beyonce and Jay tend to take, where because Beyonce is who she is, she is held to this really ridiculous standard, right?

So that’s the first thing. I don’t believe that Kelis is a co-writer on “Milkshake.” Even if she were, there are two parts to song ownership. There is lyrics and there is composition. This is aside from the masters ownership, which I know is confusing. There’s masters and there’s publishing. The masters is ownership of the recorded song itself, the version that’s on an album, the version that was released for sale. Then when you’re talking about an interpolation, we’re not talking about masters clearance. We’re talking solely about publishing.

So we are looking at either composition and lyrics or both. Even if Kelis was a co-writer of “Milkshake,” she would not have been part of this because the producers of “Energy” interpolate the track, not the lyrics, not the vocals. So for the people who are like, “Well it’s Kelis’s song,” it’s also Pharrell and Chad’s song. Kelis performed that song. It is not solely Kelis’s song. There’s nothing of Kelis on “Energy.”

One of the things that I wanted to ask you about was that we’ve seen a lot of these contract publishing rights disputes come up a lot more in recent years.

I have a couple of answers and they go in a couple of different directions. The first thing is that sometimes artists get great counsel and they don’t listen. Sometimes it’s pressure. Sometimes it’s promises that sound good in the moment. Sometimes it’s “Who you going to listen to, them or me? You should trust me. I’m your family. I got your best interest at heart.” It’s any number of things.

There is also, like Kelis, there is a production deal. Kelis was not signed directly to a major. Kelis was signed to Star Trak. Now, when you are signed to a production deal, that means that that company, like with a major label, is going to front all the costs to develop you, to make your music, to basically put together a whole package, and then shop you to a label. But shop you as part of them. It’s a package deal. So the production company gets signed to the label. So what happens is there is a pass-through before you even see your money. And usually, when you hear artists complain about they ain’t seen a dollar, they ain’t see no dough, not even an advance, it’s because they were to a production deal.

So why do we think Beyonce removed the vocal portion and not the actual interpolation, which was the drums?

Right. She did not remove the actual interpolation of the song. That’s important because even outlets are reporting stuff like, “Beyonce removed contested Kelis sample.” There was no Kelis sample, that was the point. People were arguing that they heard Kelis’ voice in those “la la las.” I ain’t hearing nobody talk about the fact that Grace Jones was on the album, but we talking about Kelis all day.

I think, knowing a little bit about how [Beyonce’s] mind works and how she operates from a business perspective, rather than have this conversation distract from the larger conversation about her album, she was like, “Let me just remove this entire distraction. Let’s just take it off the table. Boom. Done.”

So how do artists avoid getting into situations like this one, or like how we’ve been talking about Megan Thee Stallion with 1501 or Fivio Foreign with Mase?

I think there does, unfortunately, have to be some self-ownership with artists who are looking to get in the business to educate themselves or to take time to find a really good manager and to ask a lot of questions. Honestly, that’s my solution for everything. Ask all the f*cking questions, ask every goddamn question. Don’t be afraid to sound stupid. If they don’t want to answer it, ask them again. Because if you don’t, or if you try to be too cool for school, or if you’re going off of an assumption, that’s how you end up X years later being like, “Well, I don’t know what happened with my deal.”

Beyoncé Appears To Be Updating ‘Renaissance’ To Remove The Contested Kelis Sample On ‘Energy’

Life comes at you fast. And Kelis might be getting what she wanted.

Last week, when Beyoncé’s Renaissance came out and immediately became the most talked-about album in the world, Kelis made it abundantly clear that she did not grant permission for samples — albeit very brief ones — from her songs to be used in Beyoncé’s “Energy.” Kelis’s anger was directed mostly at Pharrell and Chad Hugo, who as The Neptunes, wrote and produced the two Kelis songs in question, “Milkshake,” and “Get Along With You,” and hence, owned the publishing rights holders who could clear the use of those samples for “Energy” (which they also co-wrote.)

“My mind is blown too because the level of disrespect and utter ignorance of all 3 parties involved is astounding,” Kelis said on Instagram, later adding in a video that, “Chad really is like an amoeba, he’s spineless. It’s a miracle he can keep his neck up, but Pharrell knows better. This is a direct hit at me, he does this stuff all the time. It’s very petty — very, very, very — and the reality is that it’s frustrating.”

Well, the issue looks to be coming to a head, as the Kelis samples seem to be getting slowly removed from “Energy” across streaming platforms from “Energy.” At press time, the end of “Energy” on Tidal was playing just Kelis’ isolated sample. Spotify was having intermittent loading issues both Beyoncé’s Renaissance tracks, as well as Kelis’ discography. Users online are claiming that Kelis’ writing credits are missing, although only Pharrell and Hugo would have had their included to begin with.

This story is being updated

Kelis’ Beef With Beyonce’s ‘Renaissance’ Sample Is A Reminder That Some Aspects Of The Music Business Need An Overhaul

Beyonce’s new album, Renaissance, has arrived and while the Beyhive is celebrating the long-awaited return of their Queen, not everyone is as enthused to hear the house and techno-influenced project. In particular, Kelis, the singer best known for her early 2000s run including tracks like “Caught Out There,” “Milkshake” and “Bossy,” has a bone or two to pick with Beyonce over one song specifically: “Energy,” which features short interpolations of her songs “Get Along with You” and “Milkshake.”

Taking to Instagram, Kelis said she felt insulted by the samples, calling them “theft” and asserting “the level of disrespect and utter ignorance of all three parties involved is astounding.” Her frustration appears to stem from the fact that she wasn’t contacted prior to the release to approve the samples, writing, “I heard about this the same way everyone else did. Nothing is ever as it seems, some of the people in this business have no soul or integrity and they have everyone fooled.”

In a later video, she elaborated, “She can contact, right? Ashnikko, who’s what, 20? She’s a young white girl, she reached out… It’s common decency.” She clarified that “it’s not about me being mad about Beyoncé,” and reiterated her arguments stemming from a few years ago when she called out Pharrell and Chad Hugo, The Neptunes, for not crediting her as a songwriter for her first two albums with them. In her view, Pharrell and Chad tricked her out of her publishing rights and the associated royalties that come with them.

Now, whether or not you agree with Kelis, her comments make one thing crystal clear and practically undeniable: The recording industry as we know it is desperately in need of an overhaul. In fact, it could be argued that reform of the current business model is decades overdue; after all, the internet nearly killed the major label system over twenty years ago when downloading .mp3s on Napster was the preferred method of music consumption for a relatively small sector of the market. Now, with the advent of streaming, blockchain, and computerized algorithms driving music discovery — and keeping track of every transaction automatically, there’s no excuse not to implement some big changes when it comes to things like attributing credits and royalties to artists.

To be fair, Beyonce did give credits to the required parties, clearing the samples and getting permission from the rights holders. Publishing administration is handled by the business people; I’m not so sure how much of a hand Beyonce personally has in that end of the creation process (probably very little, considering the seeming 1 billion other details she personally oversees, from choreography to costuming). And Kelis did sign those contracts — or neglected to sign the split sheets — that abdicated her share of publishing to Star Trak.

But that might be the biggest part of the problem. How many artists have we seen come forward over the past few years about regrettable terms they didn’t understand in contracts they signed as teenagers? What does a 17-year-old know about the masters rights or publishing rights or how an advance works? And for what it’s worth, we’ve seen how supposed industry veterans like Kanye West, who was in his mid-20s when he signed with Def Jam after working with the label for years on multiple hits, clearly don’t get how these things work. Who’s to say, without looking at the contracts in question, that Pharrell himself even knows what he signed Kelis to?

If we’re going to point fingers, we’ve got to point them at the powers that be, the folks who set up the system and profit the most from it — and who refuse to change it to keep with the times. With so many new technologies available, wouldn’t it make sense to review some of these “industry standard” contracts and revise the industry standards to fit modern conditions? Thanks to technology, labels have new avenues to market and promote music and turn a profit on their investments, wouldn’t it behoove them to share those profits with the people generating the product? If the industry is a house, archaic practices are the termites destroying it from the inside while the changing times are the weather, slowly stripping away the paint and wearing down the roof.

I get why they wouldn’t want to perform a top-down overhaul. It’d be costly, it’d be time-consuming, and it’d take a lot more work than they’re already putting in to generate record revenues. But just like with a house, if you don’t do the maintenance, eventually all those little problems add up to bigger problems and you find yourself looking for a new place to live. The near collapse of the industry in the early 2000s should have been a warning; while the labels narrowly escaped their demise then, it was by innovating and challenging the status quo. Unfortunately, some seemed to have missed the lesson. The next epochal shift in music technology could be right around the corner, and next time, they might not be able to save themselves.

Kelis Accused Beyoncé Of Stealing Sample On New ‘Renaissance’ Album

beyonce kelis sample renaissance

Singer-songwriter Kelis is accusing Beyoncé of stealing a sample for her new album, Renaissance.  Beyoncé’s track, “Energy”, samples Kelis’ “Get Along With You” from her 1999 debut album, Kaleidoscope

Kelis is saying the sample was used without any notification, approval or permission, and she herself didn’t know her song was being used on Beyonce’s album until she found out on social media.

The 42-year-old R&B singer made several comments online about the song, calling it “theft,” “robbery,” and “disrespectful.” 

“My mind is blown too because the level of disrespect and utter ignorance of all 3 parties involved is astounding” she expressed online. “I heard about this the same way everyone else did. Nothing is ever as it seems, some of the people in this business have no soul or integrity and they have everyone fooled.”

READ MORE: Beyoncé Taps Collaborators Jay-Z, Mike Dean, The-Dream and More on “Renaissance” LP Out July 29

“Get Along With You” was written and produced by Pharrell Williams and Chad Hugo of The Neptunes and are also listed in the artist credits for the Renaissance track, “Energy.” Kelis is not credited.

Beyoncé made no comment on the matter, instead announcing two more albums after Renaissance drops.

Share your thoughts and comments with us on social media.

The post Kelis Accused Beyoncé Of Stealing Sample On New ‘Renaissance’ Album appeared first on The Source.

Kelis Calls Out Pharrell And Chad Hugo Over Allegedly Not Clearing The Beyoncé ‘Renaissance’ Sample With Her

Earlier today, Kelis voiced her frustrations over one of her records being sampled on Beyoncé’s upcoming album Renaissance without it being cleared. She commented on the @kelistrends Instagram page and went back and forth with fans who were excited about the “collaboration.” Evidently, the Harlem artist had much more to get off of her chest in the form of a near three-minute rant that a fan posted to Twitter, where Kelis called out Pharrell and Chad Hugo for purposely participating in the “theft.”

From the very beginning of the video, the 42-year-old clarifies that her beef is not only with Beyoncé, who she says has copied her before much like many other artists. “The issue is not only are we female artists, Black female artists, in an industry that there’s not that many of us,” Kelis says. “We’ve met each other, we know each other, we have mutual friends. It’s not hard, she can contact me.” She then compares the situation to when Ashnikko went through the proper channels to connect with her to clear “Deal With It,” where she sampled Kelis’s “Caught Out There.”

Kelis continued her diatribe by calling the “Bey Hive” sheep for defending her and pointing out how Kelis doesn’t own her music before turning her attention to Pharrell and Chad Hugo.

“Chad really is like an amoeba, he’s spineless. It’s a miracle he can keep his neck up, but Pharrell knows better. This is a direct hit at me, he does this stuff all the time. It’s very petty–very, very, very–and the reality is that it’s frustrating. I have the right to be frustrated. Why? Because no one had the human decency to call and be like ‘Yo, hey, would like to use your record.’ Which, by the way, is the reason I’m annoyed because I know it was on purpose.”

A new Beyoncé release always causes hysteria, so this situation isn’t too surprising, but it will be interesting to see how it unfolds. As of now, there have been no comments from the Lemonade artist, Pharrell, or Hugo.