Need some advice on hardware sampling license issues

[koolkeys]

Well, as you all know, I am the owner of Sample Torrents, where we have had some really cool stuff come up. But there has been a recent flurry of stuff appear there that has been sampled off of hardware pieces.

So here's the deal. I don't want to let anything happen that is illegal. The site needs to stay on the up and up. But I need some advice, as this is a touchy issue.

What do you know about distributing samples that were recorded from hardware? And if there are any experts, what would you advise? I want this site to last, and this is one way you can help me to do this.

I really appreciate all the help. I figure I should sort these issues out early, just in case. Thank you so much.

Brent

[BertKoor]

In my opinion it's OK to sample hardware and distribute these. It's not like a set of samples is the very same thing as the complete hardware device. Tweakability on samples is far less than the original gear.

Maybe ask Steve aka HollowSun. He hosted dozens of sampled pieces of hardware in the past, and never had legal troubles as far as I know. He actually owned the samples since they were his creations (or donated to him), so he may do whatever he likes with them.

And look at it like this: if you own hardware you may use it in productions and publish results. No special license needed. An instrument is created to be used and recordings may be published. Single note samples are products too!

"Legal" workaround: I composed a piece of music!
Title: Roland D20 percussion dump.
Genre: minimal.
Tempo = 70bpm.
To be played by a Roland D-20 set to the percussion bank.

Code: Select all

| C0 C#0 D0 D#0 | E0 F0 F#0 G0 | G#0 A0 A#0 B0 |
| C1 C#1 D1 D#1 | E1 F1 F#1 G1 | G#1 A1 A#1 B1 |
| C2 C#2 D2 D#2 | E2 F2 F#2 G2 | G#2 A2 A#2 B2 |
| C3 C#3 D3 D#3 | E3 F3 F#3 G3 | G#3 A3 A#3 B3 |
| C4 C#4 D4 D#4 | E4 F4 F#4 G4 | G#4 A4 A#4 B4 |
| C5 C#5 D5 D#5 | E5 F5 F#5 G5 | G#5 A5 A#5 B5 |
| C6 C#6 D6 D#6 | E6 F6 F#6 G6 | G#6 A6 A#6 B6 |

This piece of "music" is published by BertKoor, so copyright (C) should apply. I'll grant licenses to reproduce this in any form to anyone that wants to

[koolkeys]

Thanks for the thoughts. I will probably try to get in touch with Hollowsun tomorrow if I get a chance.

I'm completely open to suggestions or comments. I just want to cover my bases. Thanks again!

Brent

[whyterabbyt]

(When I say 'recording' below, I actually mean 'recording and redistributing in a form that is not part of a musical composition'. Its just shorter this way)

Recording 'old style' analog hardware without presets - fine

Recording digital hardware based on samples (including PCM waves, technically) - not fine unless permissson has been granted.

Recording digital hardware not based on samples, or analog hardware with some kind of preset - grey area, but generally guaranteed fine as long as its not someone else's presets being used. May also be fine to record the presets as long as permission of the preset author is given.

(And I dont care about all the people who'll bitch about 'we should be allowed to do this, that, the other, et.c.; this is how the law generally defines it, and its pretty much been confirmed by 'big name' sample/preset designer folk like Spectrum and Squids et.c. here)

[jupiter8]

As far as i know sampling the waveforms OR the original patches is NOT allowed. If you do your own patches it is.
That is how i understand it from reading about this issue in previous threads.

edit:nitpicking bastards.

[koolkeys]

Hmmm, very interesting. I'm going to have to come up with a system for this, to rewrite the rules. I want to stay legal, as I've said.

The problem comes when you really don't know how the samples were made. Which is a problem I have. Some of the samples uploaded are not detailed in the description to say how they were recorded.

I'll have to do some thinking, and see if anyone else chimes in on this. It's been helpful so far. Thanks guys.

Brent

[BertKoor]

As far as i know sampling the waveforms and the original patches is NOT allowed. If you do your own patches it is.

And how are you supposed to get the original waveform without some patching? Grey area indeed...

[jupiter8]

As far as i know sampling the waveforms and the original patches is NOT allowed. If you do your own patches it is.

And how are you supposed to get the original waveform without some patching? Grey area indeed...

I should have written or instead.
I have studied logic and should have known better.

[Ildon]

Okay, here's what I've been told by WilliamK:

Romplers and the like - it's okay to sample presets and sounds you made yourself, but NOT okay to sample the basic waveforms.

Synthesizers (FM, analog, etc.) - these are considered instruments like a guitar, so you can sample these to your heart's desire.

[Brian2112]

Well, it's safe to say that you can't sample a Triton or a Roland XV and sell it - not even you own patches made with basic sawtooths, sine etc. Going back as far as the D50 (or even further), an "oscillator" became simply a sample playback generator, and therefore, PCM data, which it is illegal to re-distribute in any form.
Some people have done this and gotten away with it (for now), but if you want to cover yourself completely, you are going to have to start from scratch, and that usually means the drawing tool in SoundForge.

[Ildon]

Roland contacted me one time, complaining I used theyre name and looks of they D50 synth. That was back on the Reaktor days. They also said I couldn't use RAW PCM sounds.

So, if you sample a preset, it is OK. But not RAW PCM sounds, can't use Roland name, can't use the instrument name.

That's what I know from what I got from theyre lawyers.

Wk

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 32&start=0

[BertKoor]

an "oscillator" became simply a sample playback generator, and therefore, PCM data, which it is illegal to re-distribute in any form.

When applying that logic, you'd have to get the samples cleared of your synth for every composition you use it in. Not very satisfying... There obviously is some contradiction in the laws, so common sense should prevail.

Oh, welcome Brian! You like Rush?

[Brian2112]

an "oscillator" became simply a sample playback generator, and therefore, PCM data, which it is illegal to re-distribute in any form.

When applying that logic, you'd have to get the samples cleared of your synth for every composition you use it in. Not very satisfying... There obviously is some contradiction in the laws, so common sense should prevail.

Oh, welcome Brian! You like Rush?

Thanks for the Welcome!
Oh yea...I'm a total Rush nut.

On the topic, Using them in musical works is not at issue, it is re-selling them that I am speaking of. You can sample all the synths you want for your own use in your own music. Try to sell the samples though and you will likely get letters.

[Ildon]

WilliamK is the guy who owns and sells Wusikstation.

[whyterabbyt]

When applying that logic, you'd have to get the samples cleared of your synth for every composition you use it in. Not very satisfying... There obviously is some contradiction in the laws, so common sense should prevail.

There's no contradiction in the law at all; the law deals with permission to redistribute. The permission comes form the originator, and it is pretty much implicit in the sale of a musical instrument that you are licensed/allowed to record its sounds as part of a musical performance.