DAW for Electronic music

[pottering]

Sure, using the $60 license until you actually received more than 20k is OK, so your argument about users seeing one upgrade before the full license is true for many people.

But you don't have to be successful to need the proper full commercial license (the real license IMO).

Gross revenue is any revenue you make, not revenue made directly from Reaper's usage, before costs. You could be in the red, it doesn't matter.

Commercial usage is any usage that leads you to earning any revenue, even indirectly.

If you used Reaper to make the audio of some youtube vid that earned you 1 dollar, in the same year you earned $20k flipping burgers, you don't actually qualify for the discounted license.

(I'm arguing under KVR rules, where I assume licenses are respected by the users. I know Cockos doesn't keep track.)

[ghettosynth]

Sure, using the $60 license until you actually received more than 20k is OK, so your argument about users seeing one upgrade before the full license is true for many people.

But you don't have to be successful to need the proper full commercial license (the real license IMO).

Gross revenue is any revenue you make, not revenue made directly from Reaper's usage, before costs. You could be in the red, it doesn't matter.

Commercial usage is any usage that leads you to earning any revenue, even indirectly.

If you used Reaper to make the audio of some youtube vid that earned you 1 dollar, in the same year you earned $20k flipping burgers, you don't actually qualify for the discounted license.

No, I disagree completely. Business revenue is not personal income. The IRS absolutely doesn't see it your way and neither do I. Moreover, it's a rather trivial matter to setup a separate business entity for your audio work.

Given the above, I interpret the licence to mean gross revenue from anything reasonably connected to the use of Reaper in the normal course of business. If you have a lawn business that earns $30k, a burger flipping job that earns you $20k and you made $5k from your home studio, you are still within the terms of the personal license.

(I'm arguing under KVR rules, where I assume licenses are respected by the users. I know Cockos doesn't keep track.)

Of course, but this doesn't mean that every half ass draconian interpretation of licenses is correct. My accountant would laugh, nonstop, at your interpretation.

In fact, given that it's on the honor system in the first place, I assume that the courts would see the most lenient interpretation of the very simple statement that is on the Cockos license agreement.

You are either an individual or business, using REAPER for a commercial purpose, and your annual gross revenue derived from commercial activity does not exceed $20,000 USD.

It is absolutely reasonable for the end user to interpret this in the most favorable terms possible. As far as I'm concerned, it is implied in the statement that commercial activity must relate to Reaper's usage. I would even argue that if your business used two DAWs and you only used Reaper 10% of the time that your commercial use of Reaper accounts for 10% of your gross revenue.

If Cockos wants stronger and more specific terms than that they need to put those terms in their license agreement.

[xbitz]

I would choose Bitwig 2 as main DAW and Bitwig2+ ReWire VST ( http://www.energy-xt.com/index.php?id=0115 ) + Reaper +

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHlBuyw3UKc
http://www.syntheticorchestra.com/articulatereaper/

for orchestration (tons of articulation changes etc.) / post processing (mixing, mastering) related tasks

ps. worth to check "DAW as Modular Framework" part from the great series of Brian https://www.sormena.org/courses/201-syn ... BreadCrumb

[pottering]

Maybe I'm wrong in my previous posts (god forbid being laughed at by an accountant), but I did google "gross revenue" before (not today, some time ago about Unreal, a game engine that also charges based on "gross revenue"):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_income

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/61

My reading of "commercial usage" comes from the Creative Commons community, the non-commercial licenses for sounds in freesound.org are interpreted as I said, anything that may potentially lead to any money, even "free" self-promotion.

It is not the only interpretation, but it sure counts as "accepted practice" in a audio-related field.

To me, the whole point of buying a commercial license is having crystal clear and safe rights about the commercial usage, not having to "interpret" or rely on unwritten "implied terms".

The vague terms on their license actually make it stronger for Cockos (less safe for the user) than more specific terms IMO.

[ghettosynth]

Maybe, I'm wrong in my previous posts (god forbid being laughed at by an accountant), but I did google "gross revenue" before (not today, some time ago about Unreal, a game engine that also charges based on "gross revenue"):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_income

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/61

You are confusing gross revenue and gross income. They are not the same thing. Your gross income can include some or all of your net business income, but, for most of us, it is primarily from our personal income due to wages.

Gross revenue is the income earned by your business entities. It does not include your income from wages.

My reading of "commercial usage" comes from the Creative Commons community, the non-commercial licenses for sounds in freesound.org are interpreted as I said, anything that may potentially lead to any money, even "free" self-promotion.

It is not the only interpretation, but it sure counts as "accepted practice" in a audio-related field.

You're over interpreting to suit your position. In simple terms, if it goes on your taxes (schedule C or other business related forms), it's gross revenue, if it doesn't, it isn't.

To me, the whole point of buying a commercial license is having crystal clear and safe rights about the commercial usage, not having to "interpret" or rely on unwritten "implied terms".

The vague terms on their license actually make it stronger for Cockos (less safe for the user) than more specific terms IMO.

Again, you're the one here confusing business income with personal income, basically, you're wrong. They have very little legal leg to stand on with that agreement.

However, your "better safe than sorry" point of view is much softer than your ridiculous claims a few posts ago. I really don't think you should be giving people advice about this.

It's a gentleman's agreement. Do the right thing as YOUR conscious decides, Cockos isn't going to sue users over this. IMNSHO, what is right is when you are making more than $19999 / year from activities directly related to the use of Reaper.

[inkwarp]

Reaper costs $225 for most people doing "film scoring and music for tv", the $60 license requirements are VERY restrictive.

20k of GROSS revenue is below the poverty line in the US (*), and pretty much anyone that regularly scores a TV gig will probably make more than that per year.


(*) IMO it is NOT a coincidence Cockos set an amount near-identical to the US poverty line for their discounted license.

this is, if you don't mind me saying, absolute cock.
reaper is a lifeline for people who have little or no income. it can do absolutely everything the op requires and more. it is ridiculously low priced and you can use it's trial mode ( again, not restricted in any way) pretty much indefinitely.
the support is some of the best for a software project. updates are constant, the forums are always full of info. etc. etc..
i don't use it much myself, but i have a friend who now makes his living doing soundtrack work specifically and he only uses Reaper.
So, if you are so poor you cannot afford $60, then use the trial.
if you are earning a living you can afford it.
so your comments are just a little ill-informed and quite baseless.

[inkwarp]

I would choose Bitwig 2 as main DAW and Bitwig2+ ReWire VST ( http://www.energy-xt.com/index.php?id=0115 ) + Reaper +

Bitwig does NOT support rewire...

[ghettosynth]

I would choose Bitwig 2 as main DAW and Bitwig2+ ReWire VST ( http://www.energy-xt.com/index.php?id=0115 ) + Reaper +

Bitwig does NOT support rewire...

Which is why there is a link there to RewireVST, which looks cool!

[pottering]

Maybe, I'm wrong in my previous posts (god forbid being laughed at by an accountant), but I did google "gross revenue" before (not today, some time ago about Unreal, a game engine that also charges based on "gross revenue"):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_income

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/61

You are confusing gross revenue and gross income. They are not the same thing. Your gross income can include some or all of your net business income, but, for most of us, it is primarily from our personal income due to wages.

Gross revenue is the income earned by your business entities. It does not include your income from wages.

My reading of "commercial usage" comes from the Creative Commons community, the non-commercial licenses for sounds in freesound.org are interpreted as I said, anything that may potentially lead to any money, even "free" self-promotion.

It is not the only interpretation, but it sure counts as "accepted practice" in a audio-related field.

You're over interpreting to suit your position. In simple terms, if it goes on your taxes (schedule C or other business related forms), it's gross revenue, if it doesn't, it isn't.

To me, the whole point of buying a commercial license is having crystal clear and safe rights about the commercial usage, not having to "interpret" or rely on unwritten "implied terms".

The vague terms on their license actually make it stronger for Cockos (less safe for the user) than more specific terms IMO.

Again, you're the one here confusing business income with personal income, basically, you're wrong. They have very little legal leg to stand on with that agreement.

However, your "better safe than sorry" point of view is much softer than your ridiculous claims a few posts ago. I really don't think you should be giving people advice about this.

It's a gentleman's agreement. Do the right thing as YOUR conscious decides, Cockos isn't going to sue users over this. IMNSHO, what is right is when you are making more than $19999 / year from activities directly related to the use of Reaper.

But then how would "gross revenue" apply to "individual using REAPER commercially"?

I mean, if "Gross revenue is the income earned by your business entities. It does not include your income from wages" then you basically removed the "under-$20k" requirement for individuals that don't earn "revenue" but earn high wages, since it does not specify under-$20k income or wages (from Reaper's usage or not) as a requirement.


I guess that would be a pretty popular interpretation.


Reaper's discounted license terms:

"...
You may use the discounted license if:

You are an individual, and REAPER is only for your personal use, or

You are an individual or business using REAPER commercially, and yearly gross revenue does not exceed USD $20,000, or

You are an educational or non-profit organization.
..."

[ghettosynth]

But then how would "gross revenue" apply to "individual using REAPER commercially"?

I mean, if "Gross revenue is the income earned by your business entities. It does not include your income from wages" then you basically removed the "under-$20k" requirement for individuals that don't earn "revenue" but earn high wages, since it does not specify under-$20k income or wages (from Reaper's usage or not) as a requirement.

Look man, you're just thoroughly confused here. I didn't "remove" anything, you just don't understand the requirement. The Reaper pricing has nothing to do with the "poverty line" whatsoever. That connection exists only in your imagination. There is no requirement that high income earners have to buy a commercial license.

If you are not earning any "revenue" from the use of Reaper then you cannot be earning more than $20k by using it commercially, by definition. If your employer has you using Reaper then you are not the one responsible for the license in the first place.

Stop giving advice, you don't know what you're talking about.

[inkwarp]

I would choose Bitwig 2 as main DAW and Bitwig2+ ReWire VST ( http://www.energy-xt.com/index.php?id=0115 ) + Reaper +

Bitwig does NOT support rewire...

Which is why there is a link there to RewireVST, which looks cool!

I stand corrected, i wasn't aware of this before today.
interesting...

[pottering]

Reaper costs $225 for most people doing "film scoring and music for tv", the $60 license requirements are VERY restrictive.

20k of GROSS revenue is below the poverty line in the US (*), and pretty much anyone that regularly scores a TV gig will probably make more than that per year.


(*) IMO it is NOT a coincidence Cockos set an amount near-identical to the US poverty line for their discounted license.

this is, if you don't mind me saying, absolute cock.
reaper is a lifeline for people who have little or no income. it can do absolutely everything the op requires and more. it is ridiculously low priced and you can use it's trial mode ( again, not restricted in any way) pretty much indefinitely.
the support is some of the best for a software project. updates are constant, the forums are always full of info. etc. etc..
i don't use it much myself, but i have a friend who now makes his living doing soundtrack work specifically and he only uses Reaper.
So, if you are so poor you cannot afford $60, then use the trial.
if you are earning a living you can afford it.
so your comments are just a little ill-informed and quite baseless.

Tracktion T5 is ACTUALLY free and the ONE SINGLE REALLY FREE FULL-FEATURED DAW that people that care about "lifeline for people who have little or no income" should be pushing;

I used Ableton Live Intro (which I bought for $29) for 3 years BECAUSE I COULDN'T AFFORD REAPER (one of the 3 DAWs I always considered buying, with Renoise and FL Studio), so save your pseudo-democratic BS to yourself.

[edit: OK sorry, my temper got me, I just want to say I do recognize inkwarp's quoted comment as well-intentioned]

[ghettosynth]

Tracktion T5 is ACTUALLY free and the ONE SINGLE REALLY FREE FULL-FEATURED DAW that people that care about "lifeline for people who have little or no income" should be pushing;

Well, it is actually free as in beer, true, but, it's always a version or two behind the times because that's the marketing strategy. So, "actually free" seems to depend on what parameters we apply. You are still being sold something. It's more like a permanent teaser demo of the latest version. Yes it's useful, but don't kid yourself into thinking that it's altruistic. It's simply a part of a marketing strategy.

I don't feel obligated to push Traktion at all. If Cockos didn't want you to be able to evaluate Reaper for as long as necessary, they would remove the "still evaluating" button.

I feel like these conversations get silly and people who regularly do 57 MPH on the freeway are arguing that others should adhere to their draconian perspective on software licenses whereas the vendor clearly intends a more balanced attitude as can be seen in their actions.

Using the trial gets annoying because of that delay, so, you will eventually want to purchase a license. However, I think that investing your time in something like Reaper is time better spent than investing it in something like Traktion, especially an old version of Traktion.

[pottering]

I did say I was arguing from KVR rules, which I see as pretty "draconian" regarding licenses and such.

I like reading KVR exactly because people argue the cost/benefit of stuff based in their actual price, instead of treating everything as it was the same price (that is, "free" from torrents).

[ghettosynth]

I did say I was arguing from KVR rules, which I see as pretty "draconian" regarding licenses and such.

I understand that, however, you are going beyond that. You are embracing those ideas to push your own agenda and making up things that are untrue as a part of the process.

I like reading KVR exactly because people argue the cost/benefit of stuff based in their actual price, instead of treating everything as it was the same price (that is, "free" from torrents).

Nobody is talking about torrenting anything. Reaper costs $60 for most users here. That is the actual cost. Your desire to make it $225 to show your preferences in a more favorable light is simply without basis.

Also, if we are going to compare Traktion and Reaper, then the cost for Traktion is not free, rather, it is $60. That is the cost of the latest version of Traktion. With Reaper, you are always getting the latest version.