FREE: Alexis D-Four ... 90s drum sounds

[tomtoo]

.... however, the view here is that it is not allowed by either U.S. or German law.

YMMV

Iam also not a lawyer and imho its very hard on the edge. But nobody has to donate or ?

What would makes me think, if i would donate, would i maybe parcipate in something illegal ?

Law's not easy !

Whether money changes hands or not isn't relevant here.

K so what makes it relevant from your opinion ?

[ghettosynth]

.... however, the view here is that it is not allowed by either U.S. or German law.

YMMV

Iam also not a lawyer and imho its very hard on the edge. But nobody has to donate or ?

What would makes me think, if i would donate, would i maybe parcipate in something illegal ?

Law's not easy !

Whether money changes hands or not isn't relevant here.

K so what makes it relevant from your opinion ?

What makes "what" relevant? The infringement is the copying and distribution of the work of Alesis. The numerous music sharing cases should tell you that it doesn't matter whether you distribute other people's work for money or whether you give it away, the act of distributing is an act of infringement.

Something that is relevant, but has not been discussed, is how Alesis feels about sampling their instruments? I asked about this in my first post in this thread. It is well known, for example that Roland draws a hard line while Korg has expressed some flexibility, i.e. that they grant some copying permissions with limitations.

[tomtoo]

.... however, the view here is that it is not allowed by either U.S. or German law.

YMMV

Iam also not a lawyer and imho its very hard on the edge. But nobody has to donate or ?

What would makes me think, if i would donate, would i maybe parcipate in something illegal ?

Law's not easy !

Whether money changes hands or not isn't relevant here.

K so what makes it relevant from your opinion ?

What makes "what" relevant? The infringement is the copying and distribution of the work of Alesis. The numerous music sharing cases should tell you that it doesn't matter whether you distribute other people's work for money or whether you give it away, the act of distributing is an act of infringement.

Something that is relevant, but has not been discussed, is how Alesis feels about sampling their instruments? I asked about this in my first post in this thread. It is well known, for example that Roland draws a hard line while Korg has expressed some flexibility, i.e. that they grant some copying permissions with limitations.

Your opinion is ok for me. Lets talk.

Is it about a law ?

Or is it about opinions ?

So my opinion.

Someone sampled some sounds. Thats it.

The soundsource is recordet ? or digital ?! No ? Yes ? No ?

[hollowsun]

I've kept out of this for various reasons not least of which is my prior association with Alesis but technically, unless permission has been granted by the IP holder (i.e. Alesis), the product is technically a contravention of Alesis' IP and copyright. It really doesn't matter whether the 'product' is free or paid for, the same legal stipulations apply, I'm afraid.

The red herring of "I recorded them myself and did all the work" is totally irrelevant and neither does it fall into the 'fair use' clause of copyright law (which is invalid in some countries ... or varies between them). 'Fair use' is typically reserved for examination, discussion, satire and so forth - NOT for the wholesale sampling of someone else's IP and then giving it away (or selling it) ... without permission from the IP holder.

FACT #1
You can sample an acoustic drum kit freely and with impunity and you can do what you want with those samples - keep them for private use, give them away or sell them. That said, be careful with the use of registered trademarks - you will need permission to use that perhaps.

FACT #2
You cannot sample a sample based drum machine (such as the Alesis D4) to give away or sell without the explicit permission of the IP holder of the samples used in the drum machine. You might be declined permission or you might need to pay a license fee.

FACT #3
You can sample a sample based drum machine FOR YOUR OWN PRIVATE USE but you can't 'share' those samples with others (however well intentioned) without the explicit permission of the IP holder (see FACT #2).

Those facts are, I'm afraid, indisputable - you can consult any lawyer with in-depth knowledge of IP copyright. I state them here because, as a developer, I have consulted such a lawyer and I have also made extensive studies of copyright law. That said...

Maybe Alesis couldn't give a rat's arse about the use of their IP in this instance given that the D4 is old and discontinued. However, you cannot second guess the situation - Alesis may well have plans to use these samples (their IP) in a future product. When I did the sound design for their DM10 eKit, I used 'legacy samples' from Alesis' previous products to add some 'old skool' elements.

In other words, you cannot assume that because a product is discontinued, you have free rein to re-purpose the samples to your own ends.

Technically, this product is illegally using someone else's IP. The fact that it is free is irrelevant.

I don't want to piss on anyone's chips but that's the legal reality I'm afraid.


Stephen

[chokehold]

But nobody has to donate or ?

No, I have no interest in money for the instruments I have out now.
Free is free.

It's long, but damn is it a good read and provides a far better perspective on the issue than is typically present in arguments here on KVR.

Uhm, no. The draft you linked is about sampling from entire, finished musical works.

It defines the term "sample" as something as trivial as snapping fingers, but it is otherwise entirely focused on the process of using parts of others' songs in your own works.

And this is the part people like you don't understand: if I go out and buy a record, I'm buying the work of another artist which I am supposed to listen to, and hopefully enjoy. As the article you personally linked defines it: "music is a hedonic product whose evaluation is based primarily on the experience it provides to a consumer rather than specific product attributes".
You're supposed to buy it, enjoy it - and that's it.

The Alesis D4 is an instrument. It is a material piece of work, yes. It was manufactured and built and programmed and designed and everything, and its samples were recorded and pre-processed and all that. But the intended USE of the product is NOT to buy it and enjoy listening to it, carrying it around in your pocket like a CD player, but you're supposed to buy it and use it as an instrument, to perform with, to create something with it.

This is the big legal discrepancy between a sampled instrument like a D4 and the musical work of, say, a Mr. Kraftwerk.

You buy one as a finished piece of hedonic art to enjoy and collect, you buy the other as a creative instrument, utilize the sounds that are stored within it and create your own musical works with them ... which may be sold later on a record, included in another finished piece of hedonic art for others to buy and enjoy and collect - but not to use as an instrument.

So the only aspect that's interesting in this case is NOT whether or not I used recordings of their recordings, because Alesis didn't sell the D4 as a record but as an instrument, but whether or not I directly copied/duplicated/cloned their original work in the form of the samples burnt onto the EEPROMS or whatever they used back then.

The process of "digital sampling" in that paper you linked is defined as identically cloning 1:1 a part of the work of someone else, as is possible if you, say, cut out a passage of a WAV file you ripped off a CD.

The CD's native format is WAV, the digital ripping process merely clones the binary 0/1 data and does not introduce any degradation (is that the right word?) to the signal, as maybe copying a page in a book with a copying machine.

So for "digital sampling" as is the topic in the draft you linked it is assumed that one has access to the original source data, "binary 1:1" if you wish. Which I would be guilty of, had I digitally ripped the sample content off their EEPROMs.

And the answer to that unasked question is quite clearly: NO, I DID NOT.

I did NOT clone their sample content, but I very much used the D4 as the instrument it is.

That means I programmed it and triggered it and recorded the many tiny performances coming out of it, just like it was intended to be used.

Understand it or don't.
But don't go shooting accusations if you can't understand what you're reading.

* http://www.sf2midi.com/soundfonts/file- ... 2-312.html
* http://www.synthpacks.com/download_alesis_samples.htm
* http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2010/ ... -machines/
* http://warbeats.com/Community/Forums/aft/57
* http://waveformless.blogspot.de/2011/11 ... is-d4.html
* http://runamux.net/down/view/file/_kLEh ... __ALE.html
* http://samples.kb6.de/machines/akai-alesis-boss.htm

There was even a guy selling them directly off his site at one point, but I guess business didn't exactly boom at those prices.
* http://web.archive.org/web/200907010039 ... sisd4.com/

And here's a current eBay auction for a clearly not "official" Sample CD.
* http://www.ebay.de/itm/ALESIS-DRUM-D-4- ... 56493cc997

Cheers,
Rob

[cytospur]

I've kept out of this for various reasons not least of which is my prior association with Alesis but technically, unless permission has been granted by the IP holder (i.e. Alesis), the product is technically a contravention of Alesis' IP and copyright. It really doesn't matter whether the 'product' is free or paid for, the same legal stipulations apply, I'm afraid.

The red herring of "I recorded them myself and did all the work" is totally irrelevant and neither does it fall into the 'fair use' clause of copyright law (which is invalid in some countries ... or varies between them). 'Fair use' is typically reserved for examination, discussion, satire and so forth - NOT for the wholesale sampling of someone else's IP and then giving it away (or selling it) ... without permission from the IP holder.

FACT #1
You can sample an acoustic drum kit freely and with impunity and you can do what you want with those samples - keep them for private use, give them away or sell them. That said, be careful with the use of registered trademarks - you will need permission to use that perhaps.

FACT #2
You cannot sample a sample based drum machine (such as the Alesis D4) to give away or sell without the explicit permission of the IP holder of the samples used in the drum machine. You might be declined permission or you might need to pay a license fee.

FACT #3
You can sample a sample based drum machine FOR YOUR OWN PRIVATE USE but you can't 'share' those samples with others (however well intentioned) without the explicit permission of the IP holder (see FACT #2).

Those facts are, I'm afraid, indisputable - you can consult any lawyer with in-depth knowledge of IP copyright. I state them here because, as a developer, I have consulted such a lawyer and I have also made extensive studies of copyright law. That said...

Maybe Alesis couldn't give a rat's arse about the use of their IP in this instance given that the D4 is old and discontinued. However, you cannot second guess the situation - Alesis may well have plans to use these samples (their IP) in a future product. When I did the sound design for their DM10 eKit, I used 'legacy samples' from Alesis' previous products to add some 'old skool' elements.

In other words, you cannot assume that because a product is discontinued, you have free rein to re-purpose the samples to your own ends.

Technically, this product is illegally using someone else's IP. The fact that it is free is irrelevant.

I don't want to piss on anyone's chips but that's the legal reality I'm afraid.


Stephen

Does this apply to instruments like the Roland D50 and D110 as well?

[chokehold]

FACT #1
FACT #2
FACT #3
I don't want to piss on anyone's chips but that's the legal reality I'm afraid.
Stephen

Thanks for chiming in.

You create your own sampled virtual instruments, and you've been doing it a helluva lot longer than I have, so I really value your words in this thread.

But do you have any "proof", meaning a quotable source of some sort, for those facts you mention?

It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that in the last decade or so I've heard and read so many different opinions and legal blurbs and articles about this, that I actually don't know what to believe anymore.

I will however contact Alesis and ask them, see if they care.

Cheers,
Rob

[Davias]

So fun, I can ditch my whole collection of free drum machines samples then ? All those free 909 packs and so on ?

[tomtoo]

FACT #1
FACT #2
FACT #3
I don't want to piss on anyone's chips but that's the legal reality I'm afraid.
Stephen

Thanks for chiming in.

You create your own sampled virtual instruments, and you've been doing it a helluva lot longer than I have, so I really value your words in this thread.

But do you have any "proof", meaning a quotable source of some sort, for those facts you mention?

It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that in the last decade or so I've heard and read so many different opinions and legal blurbs and articles about this, that I actually don't know what to believe anymore.

I will however contact Alesis and ask them, see if they care.

Cheers,
Rob

Whats the law ?

If people dont like to talk about whats fair ?

[olepro]

I could create a non-DFD player without problems, but that would mean ALL the samples (of the loaded instrument pack) are loaded into RAM, which would mean a constant RAM footprint of 50 to 75 MB -per AD4 instance- rather than just the few it takes now.

Why not just let us have the samples so we can load what we want to load?

Why not just google the D4 samples ?
http://waveformless.blogspot.dk/2011/11 ... is-d4.html

[Ligidium]

I could create a non-DFD player without problems, but that would mean ALL the samples (of the loaded instrument pack) are loaded into RAM, which would mean a constant RAM footprint of 50 to 75 MB -per AD4 instance- rather than just the few it takes now.

Why not just let us have the samples so we can load what we want to load?

Why not just google the D4 samples ?
http://waveformless.blogspot.dk/2011/11 ... is-d4.html

Because chokehold's sound the best. I keep finding samples with truncated tails or samples that are mono, or often both, while chokehold's are stereo and fully play out. Not sure if the original samples are mono and chokehold did something to them but they are definitely of a higher quality than any previous collection of D4 samples I've ever found.

[ghettosynth]

But nobody has to donate or ?

No, I have no interest in money for the instruments I have out now.
Free is free.

It's long, but damn is it a good read and provides a far better perspective on the issue than is typically present in arguments here on KVR.

Uhm, no. The draft you linked is about sampling from entire, finished musical works.

It defines the term "sample" as something as trivial as snapping fingers, but it is otherwise entirely focused on the process of using parts of others' songs in your own works.

And this is the part people like you don't understand:

First, let's be clear wtf is "people like me?" Second, the only person not understanding here is you. While I think that there's room for interpretation within copyright law for a distinction between samples in an instrument and "music recordings", no such distinction is currently recognized and my opinion means jack all, both within the legal systems of our respective countries, and here on KVR, where, what you are describing is most certainly frowned upon. Whether you like it or not, any sample is, by definition, a recording.

The paper that I linked is a great read about the current state of copyright law and sampling. You should try and understand how it applies to projects like this as your opinion isn't going to help you if you get sued.

But do you have any "proof", meaning a quotable source of some sort, for those facts you mention?

His statements are an interpretation of the current rulings on copyright with respect to sampling. It's a reasonable interpretation that, even if challenged, will not likely result in an outcome that will make your work legal. Since you sampled the entire D4, or a majority of it, you really couldn't use a "di minimis" defense. The only hope that you would have is that such works were not at all protected by copyright and I doubt that such an outcome has any hope as there is no precedent elsewhere, e.g. even banal stock photographs receive copyright protection. There is case law regarding this and it was discussed in another post on this same topic:

There is US case law on the issue of copying of samples, and the case is Roland Corp v Atmel Corp. In this case Roland successfully sued Atmel because they copied the samples in Roland's Sound Canvas product and re-distributed them on sound cards for use in karaoke machines. The US courts held that the Roland samples were sound recordings stored in a digital storage medium, and copyright subsisted within them. It can also be argued that a certain amount of skill and judgment is required to create useable samples, as I am sure many of you will testify to.

This case says it all really! If what you are taking, or re-recording, originates from any sample-based instrument, or software sample library, or sample library on CD Rom, or sampled waveform, then you are infringing copyright. You can sample your own synths that are not based upon sample waveforms or hybrid systems. Pure synthesis is not an issue because there is no "recording" that you are copying.

See the rest of the discussion here:

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

Note that I participated substantially in this conversation providing several examples of ways that the law might be challenged. To be clear, I don't think that sampling an entire instrument will ever be successful, as per the Roland vs. Atmel case. I argue in that thread that a more limited copying may prove successful under other defenses when the original sample has questionable status as a protected recording.

More discussion of the case here:

http://www.chillingeffects.org/reverse/ ... ticeID=898

So, as you can see from this, the current perspective of the courts is that "samples" ARE a "sound recording" which is protected by specific copyright laws that, in particular, do not allow ANY copying without permission in both the United States and Germany.

It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that in the last decade or so I've heard and read so many different opinions and legal blurbs and articles about this, that I actually don't know what to believe anymore.

If it's anything like this conversation, you've heard a bunch of misinformation.

I will however contact Alesis and ask them, see if they care.

That's the thing to do, but, you should probably do that before you distribute anything.

[HenriAugusto]

Hollowsun is right. Yet...

I will however contact Alesis and ask them, see if they care.

Don't forget to mention that it might end being good marketing for them. People will have a taste of their products! They might being feeling generous that day.

Goodluck.

[arkmabat]

So fun, I can ditch my whole collection of free drum machines samples then ? All those free 909 packs and so on ?

Technically the 909 cymbals are copywrited samples being played back but the 909 drum hits are being synthesized in real time, so the hits are fine to sample, not the cymbals though.

[hollowsun]

And this is the part people like you don't understand:

<snip>

The Alesis D4 is an instrument. It is a material piece of work, yes. It was manufactured and built and programmed and designed and everything, and its samples were recorded and pre-processed and all that. But the intended USE of the product is NOT to buy it and enjoy listening to it, carrying it around in your pocket like a CD player, but you're supposed to buy it and use it as an instrument, to perform with, to create something with it.

The latter part is what you don't understand.

As you say...

"It was manufactured and built and programmed and designed and everything, and its samples were recorded and pre-processed"

Yes. A lot of work, time, experience, expertise, expense and so on went into the creation of the original product ... Alesis did all the work, they hired the drums, the drummer, the studio, the recording engineers, they recorded the samples and then people edited them and programmers and sound designers made them playable. In total, it probably took months of work at considerable expense. Then there's the mechanical engineering, the tooling up for mass production, the testing, debugging, the marketing and so on. Serious money.

And you think you can just record all that into your PC in an afternoon and give it away? It is IP and copyright contravention, pure and simple, whatever justification you may care to fabricate! Sorry.


Stephen