HISE, an open source competitor to Kontakt

[padillac]

All we are doing is talking about issues, what exactly makes you think i am not calm ?

You've been going on about the same thing for 5 pages now, getting more aggressive with each post.

If potential users discussing issues have no chance of ever changing anything with this developer, thanks for letting us know padillac, i guess you already have previous issues with the developer that make you think this ?

Nope not at all. Beating the same dead horse won't change what Chris does. Just like me beating the same dead horse won't change what you do.

And that's twice that you seem to have deliberately misrepresented what I said, so I'll relieve you of that burden from here on out.

[Chrisboy2000]

This thread helped me a lot to get a better impression of the needs of developers, but I also agree that everybody in this thread made their statements clear. It most definetily will have an impact on the new licencing but as long as there isn't something else to discuss than the licencing I think we can set an end point to this.

I am thinking about setting up a (anonymous) survey with questions regarding the licence model so I can get a more complete feedback from more developers. Is this something you would be interested in?

[jupiter8]

I'm not up to snuff on the latest JUCE and OS licenses but what's stopping me from just releasing a HISE player for free ?
Not to clear on how HISE works either for that matter.

[bungle]

So when did the self appointed moderators start happening around KVR ?
Maybe i shouldn't answer Chris now about his survey idea Padillac ?

No matter how many replies i make, unless a moderator says the thread is closed, the discussion is not closed, and you are not a moderator padillac, stop telling other forum users how/what to post.

Chris i am less interested in surveys (Yes i will take it) than having concrete information.

I'm not up to snuff on the latest JUCE and OS licenses but what's stopping me from just releasing a HISE player for free ?
Not to clear on how HISE works either for that matter.

Nothing at all, it is open source.
But the discussion has been more about compiling standalones and cost of licence for that really, as i pointed out earlier, there is nothing stopping somebody compiling a standalone with a bunch of default samples, releasing that as source and then selling add on packs, while it would be a very scummy thing to do, i brought it up because it is an obvious loophole, unless add on sample packs wont be supported, that being the case the value of HISE drops anyway.
These are the worries some people have, and are being ignored/unanswered entirely.

[Akta]

GPL means everything you need to compile and use the plugin must be made availabe to the public, which includes samples and all HISE files.

WRONG !

WAVs and samples in general are copyright of their authors, they can't be GPLed as GPL only applies to CODE and not to creative things like audio or video or graphics or photos.

You must be misinformed about this, this is the norm in web design and especially in commercial templates, see what Envato is doing for their GPL Wordpress templates, the code is GPL but not the CSS and not the icons, images, and graphics.

I can legally compile a plugin made with HISE, sell it and give the source code on my site, but nobody can legally steal my sound library running on it for the simple reason they have different licences : the code is GPL but the WAVs are not ! (unless stated otherwise by the WAV's author).

Moreover, do you really think experienced coders can't obfuscate your C++ code and giving nothing back to you and the JUCE team crooks ? think again ...

[Akta]

I'm not up to snuff on the latest JUCE and OS licenses but what's stopping me from just releasing a HISE player for free ?

nothing, all you need to do is to make an official "fork" on Github, but it must be GPL3 as Juce and Hise.

this discussion is pointless, once you can access the whole source code of a product there are 1000s ways to obfuscate the compiled code, no way for Juce or Hise authors to prove you used their framework.

illegal ? try sueing a company in china or india, good luck with that, and while you're at it they'll keep making money with your code, at worst they'll close down and reopen with a new name the next day.

[SampleScience]

I'm not up to snuff on the latest JUCE and OS licenses but what's stopping me from just releasing a HISE player for free ?

nothing, all you need to do is to make an official "fork" on Github, but it must be GPL3 as Juce and Hise.

this discussion is pointless, once you can access the whole source code of a product there are 1000s ways to obfuscate the compiled code, no way for Juce or Hise authors to prove you used their framework.

illegal ? try sueing a company in china or india, good luck with that, and while you're at it they'll keep making money with your code, at worst they'll close down and reopen with a new name the next day.

I agree.

[jupiter8]

I'm not up to snuff on the latest JUCE and OS licenses but what's stopping me from just releasing a HISE player for free ?

nothing, all you need to do is to make an official "fork" on Github, but it must be GPL3 as Juce and Hise.

this discussion is pointless, once you can access the whole source code of a product there are 1000s ways to obfuscate the compiled code, no way for Juce or Hise authors to prove you used their framework.

illegal ? try sueing a company in china or india, good luck with that, and while you're at it they'll keep making money with your code, at worst they'll close down and reopen with a new name the next day.

It wasn't a critisism,i was just curious about the business model and GPL. He says i need a license to do this and that and as far as i know i don't in many cases. He was talking about selling a free player for 20 bucks and to me it looks fairly simple to do that myself. And if i do that what is stopping me from selling my libraries without giving him a cut ? I mean legally and morally ? Of course i can do whatever i want but even if i want to play by the rules i don't really see an issue.

I asked mostly because i'm interested in how GPL works and i'm generally curious.

[whyterabbyt]

WAVs and samples in general are copyright of their authors, they can't be GPLed as GPL only applies to CODE and not to creative things like audio or video or graphics or photos.

Wrong. There's nothing intrinsic to the GPL that means it can only be applied to code and cannot be applied to other media. The GPL FAQ states that explicitly.

For example, the FAQ for the GPL specifically states that the GPL could be used for their own manuals and documentation. The reason that they dont, that they use a documentation-specific license, is only because so much of the GPL is specific to what is applicable to code.

The same FAQ includes information on applying to GPL at least one example of what you're describing as 'creative things,' namely fonts.

The GPL is not a particularly great license for non-code media, but the license certainly does not only apply to code.

Now, if you want to argue that the 'sticky' nature of the GPL does not apply to media included as part of the redistribution of a GPL'd package, that's a somewhat different thing. Its not the case that the GPL 'sticks' to media that the GPL'd code is intended to play back, the GPL applies to what's derived from the GPL'd package alone. That doesnt mean there cant be GPL'd media files in that package though.
In short, dont conflate the data for the package with the package; they are separate.

You must be misinformed about this, this is the norm in web design and especially in commercial templates, see what Envato is doing for their GPL Wordpress templates, the code is GPL but not the CSS and not the icons, images, and graphics.

I think you're the one who's misinformed. The fact that something is not being done by one group or anothere does not mean that it cannot be done.

I can legally compile a plugin made with HISE, sell it and give the source code on my site, but nobody can legally steal my sound library running on it for the simple reason they have different licences : the code is GPL but the WAVs are not ! (unless stated otherwise by the WAV's author).

That's a separate issue from whether or not the GPL can be applied to WAV files.

[DuX]

If it were payware, the chances would be greater as there would be the money incentive and support to provide. Even Flowstone and SynthEdit cost money!

Oh, you mean like Camel Audio Alchemy perhaps? I wholeheartedly agree.

Nothing is a guarantee these days. Payware or not. Companies change and/or merge, companies shut down. Open Source is actually a better guarantee because someone can fork it, someone can also take over if the development comes to a halt.

[viceverser]

An elegant solution to the "sales of libraries for the upcoming player" idea, would be to have a package handler system in the player, that can direct users to a web store for purchases, which then makes the "package" available in the player when the user logs into their HISE account from the HISE player.

I saw the package handler in bitwig before i stopped using it (they adopted an upgrade subscription model a year ago and from the day the news broke I stopped using it) I thought Bitwig was going to implement this type of package store originally, which is pure genius.

It could be a no brainer... pushed updates, the repo maintained by Chris, a small sales %, and the store front would be an e-commerce website, the only thing the player would need is the package handler added.

You could also maybe add the ability to publish to the repo directly from within HISE?
And the Dev's could pay a very reasonable setup fee (or free, but as it's a service, a fee seems reasonable) on signing up, after that it's a matter of waiting for the Dev's to create content for you to sell. Then It's a small one off publishing/hosting fee (priced depending on the samples/hosting size), and as long as it sells (x) amount of unit's (again based on storage size) no further hosting fee's. You then retain your profit share of sales.

This way risk is minimised for all parties concerned. The Dev's have less up front risk while supporting the HISE platform with content, Chris retains the shop front, and thus guarantees his self generating profit share, and the customer base has a unified experience, go to the site, pay for the product, open the app, sign in to account, click download from Package handler... no manual loading of libraries, or complicated licence handling... just a HISE login.

For the Dev's and users not ready to integrate with the repo for whatever reason, they can still manually share/install free HISE presets through the GPL.

And the custom vst pricing can be totally separate, for the Developers not investing in the HISE end user platform.

I know there is a lot of variables here, but I do believe it's the way to go.

Anyways... This would be my dream scenario.

I hope this is inspiring to Chris and Co.

Cheers, V.

[baaz]

GPL means everything you need to compile and use the plugin must be made availabe to the public, which includes samples and all HISE files.

This is COMPLETELY FALSE.

HISE(GPL code) can be sold with the the sample library without paying any licensing fee as long as the code (open sourced hosted somewhere) and the sample libraries are not statically linked. For example a zip file or installer containing HISE and separate library file which user can load into hise. Almost every major OS or platform(from iot devices to satellites) relies on GPL’d code doesn’t mean they all have to be open source. Check out about page in iOS/MacOS(closed source and commercial) it contains references to gpl’d software used and the whole licence, Android is released under Apache license(usually bundled/sold with plethora of closed source google/OEM code) which is way more permissive than GPL and it heavily relies on GPL’d code and linux kernel(most used gpl code).

It’s completely OKAY to sell GPL code(HISE bundled with commercial proprietary libraries) as long as you open source the code(HISE) and modifications to the code and as long as you don’t code your libraries into HiSE code itself you don’t have to release them under GPL.

Almost every major software company is selling GPL’d code bundled with their products(Hardware/Software) in some way Apple, Microsoft etc all the big names and there is no obligations that they have to pay any fee to developers they just have to contribute(open source) back the changes they made to the original code they used, GPL serves the code itself not the developers.

Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer and this shouldn’t be considered as a legal advice in any way

[teilo]

GPL means everything you need to compile and use the plugin must be made availabe to the public, which includes samples and all HISE files.

This is COMPLETELY FALSE.

HISE(GPL code) can be sold with the the sample library without paying any licensing fee as long as the code (open sourced hosted somewhere) and the sample libraries are not statically linked. …

It’s completely OKAY to sell GPL code(HISE bundled with commercial proprietary libraries) as long as you open source the code(HISE) and modifications to the code and as long as you don’t code your libraries into HiSE code itself you don’t have to release them under GPL.

Not only that, but the head developer of HISE sells Hexeract - a commercial product built on HISE.

[Gamma-UT]

Not only that, but the head developer of HISE sells Hexeract - a commercial product built on HISE.

HISE is offered under a dual-licence structure similar to Qt and JUCE. It's not stated explicitly but I imagine Hexeract is using the commercial HISE licence not the GPL one.

[baaz]

Not only that, but the head developer of HISE sells Hexeract - a commercial product built on HISE.

HISE is offered under a dual-licence structure similar to Qt and JUCE. It's not stated explicitly but I imagine Hexeract is using the commercial HISE licence not the GPL one.

I guess the poing teilo is trying to make is that the developer himself is selling a commercial/proprietary version of HISE while claiming "GPL means everything you need to compile and use the plugin must be made availabe to the public, which includes samples and all HISE files."