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

[ghettosynth]

Well coming full circle, is it fair use to sample an antiquated drum machine from the 1990's that is no longer in production by the creator?

Technically, no - it is not fair use. The creator owns copyright for many years (typically life + 50-70 years). Now, whether the creator is going to pursue any contravention once production has ceased is another matter. They may even be pleased that you are reviving their antiquated drum machine (as I have found in seeking permission for such stuff ... "Oh - I'd be delighted")

Whether it uses samples or not...is kind of a moot point from a fair use standpoint.

Not quite. It is THE point!

And we have to get away from this "fair use" thing. As mentioned, fair use (which varies from country to country) is typically there for discussion, scrutiny, examination (for example, in an educational establishment) or satire. Thus you can, say, hand out a snippet of a Prince track in a music class for analysis and discussion and/or some comedian could do a piss take of it. But even the latter is fraught with possible complications. When Weird Al Jankovich did his piss takes, he sought permission ... and rightly so - he was essentially recreating the records (copyrighted) and adding his spoof lyrics.

Uh, no. Parody is generally considered protected fair use. Al seeks permission for several reasons, but, has publicly acknowledged that he does this out of respect for the artist and not because he is obligated by law. Fair use is an affirmative defense, you can't say "you can't sue me because my use is fair", but, if your use is fair, you will win in court. If, on the other hand, you obtain permission, then it is not necessary to argue fair use. So Al doesn't seek permission because it's "right", he does so because it is efficient given the business that he's in.

2 Live Crew won against Roy Orbison for their parody of pretty woman.

This is parody, if this is what you're going to do, you don't have to get permission from the original artist. When a "usage" of copyrighted material is considered "fair", then it is NOT copyright infringement.

[Tricky-Loops]

Just wondering why nobody has said anything when others have presented their sample libraries from old drum machines, synths etc.

Every few weeks there is another free sample library based on samples from drum machine/samplers by someone...

There is even someone who collects tons of samples from all drum machines, and he offers many GB of drum samples from all kind of drum machines/samplers (for a small donation). But nobody has said anything here against him...

How can I see if someone sells samples legally? How can I see if he/she has asked the manufacturer for permission? They don't write anything about it in their own license; they don't add a letter from Roland/Yamaha/Alesis/Akai etc. with the permission.

I gotta quote myself because nobody has replied to my question yet:

How can I see - when I buy a sample library based on samples of drum machines/samplers/synths - if the content is legally flawless? As a purchaser I cannot ask for every sample library Alesis, Roland, Yamaha, Akai or whatever if the content was sampled with their permission...in most cases there isn't any indication in the license of the sample library vendor.

[ghettosynth]

Just wondering why nobody has said anything when others have presented their sample libraries from old drum machines, synths etc.

Every few weeks there is another free sample library based on samples from drum machine/samplers by someone...

There is even someone who collects tons of samples from all drum machines, and he offers many GB of drum samples from all kind of drum machines/samplers (for a small donation). But nobody has said anything here against him...

How can I see if someone sells samples legally? How can I see if he/she has asked the manufacturer for permission? They don't write anything about it in their own license; they don't add a letter from Roland/Yamaha/Alesis/Akai etc. with the permission.

It's probably more about who's attention it grabs and how they grab that attention. This conversation started because the OP asserted that he had commercial intentions and I simply asked him if he'd considered copyright issues. Of course, one's project doesn't have to be commercial for this to be a concern, but it sets more peoples "that's irritating" flags than non-commercial usage does. Consequently, it becomes more difficult to "fly under the radar" if you start taking about your commercial usage of someone else's material.

The last conversation that I remember about this was with respect to the Fairlight library that some kid was doing for kontakt.

[DuX]

Thank you, Chokehold, for making this instrument and giving it for free.

+1 for making the Kontakt version of it. [like: go go go! ]

-1 for last 5-6 pages...

[ghettosynth]

Just wondering why nobody has said anything when others have presented their sample libraries from old drum machines, synths etc.

Every few weeks there is another free sample library based on samples from drum machine/samplers by someone...

There is even someone who collects tons of samples from all drum machines, and he offers many GB of drum samples from all kind of drum machines/samplers (for a small donation). But nobody has said anything here against him...

How can I see if someone sells samples legally? How can I see if he/she has asked the manufacturer for permission? They don't write anything about it in their own license; they don't add a letter from Roland/Yamaha/Alesis/Akai etc. with the permission.

I gotta quote myself because nobody has replied to my question yet:

How can I see - when I buy a sample library based on samples of drum machines/samplers/synths - if the content is legally flawless? As a purchaser I cannot ask for every sample library Alesis, Roland, Yamaha, Akai or whatever if the content was sampled with their permission...in most cases there isn't any indication in the license of the sample library vendor.

First, you spoke to soon, but second, I'm not sure that you can. I'm also sure that I've got some sample libraries that I've paid for that have uncleared content. I wouldn't worry about it too much. The reality is that it's not that important unless you plan to create sample libraries yourself, and, the product you buy almost certainly doesn't allow that.

Instrument manufacturers are not likely to sue someone who releases a song with their samples in them. So, whether you got those samples from the instrument, or from a sample CD, your song probably isn't going to attract the attention of anyone with standing.

[ghettosynth]

Thank you, Chokehold, for making this instrument and giving it for free.

+1 for making the Kontakt version of it. [like: go go go! ]

-1 for last 5-6 pages...

You know, what pisses me off is not the copyright infringement. Frankly, from a personal point of view, I could give a shit. What pisses me off is the encouragement of it. The reason that this pisses me off is because it gets in the way of having intelligent conversations about copyright itself. It sets the moderators pissed off flags and they simply clamp down on any conversation about copyright. Further, it attracts devs who also, quite reasonably, want to shut down the activity, but this impacts the quality of the conversation.

Where's Meffy when you need him?

[Tricky-Loops]

Just wondering why nobody has said anything when others have presented their sample libraries from old drum machines, synths etc.

Every few weeks there is another free sample library based on samples from drum machine/samplers by someone...

There is even someone who collects tons of samples from all drum machines, and he offers many GB of drum samples from all kind of drum machines/samplers (for a small donation). But nobody has said anything here against him...

How can I see if someone sells samples legally? How can I see if he/she has asked the manufacturer for permission? They don't write anything about it in their own license; they don't add a letter from Roland/Yamaha/Alesis/Akai etc. with the permission.

It's probably more about who's attention it grabs and how they grab that attention. This conversation started because the OP asserted that he had commercial intentions and I simply asked him if he'd considered copyright issues. Of course, one's project doesn't have to be commercial for this to be a concern, but it sets more peoples "that's irritating" flags than non-commercial usage does. Consequently, it becomes more difficult to "fly under the radar" if you start taking about your commercial usage of someone else's material.

The last conversation that I remember about this was with respect to the Fairlight library that some kid was doing for kontakt.

But my question wasn't why this conversation started...I haven't participated in this discussion till now because there are so many sample libraries from drum machines/samplers out there that Rob cannot be the only one who has done that...

However, my question was how can I know if I download a free library or buy a commercial library if the samples are legally flawless?

I've never read a clarification in a license like "These samples were sampled with permission of...and..."

[ghettosynth]

However, my question was how can I know if I download a free library or buy a commercial library if the samples are legally flawless?

I've never read a clarification in a license like "These samples were sampled with permission of...and..."

See my second post to you, you've got to keep up....cmon...

[Tricky-Loops]

How can I see - when I buy a sample library based on samples of drum machines/samplers/synths - if the content is legally flawless? As a purchaser I cannot ask for every sample library Alesis, Roland, Yamaha, Akai or whatever if the content was sampled with their permission...in most cases there isn't any indication in the license of the sample library vendor.

First, you spoke to soon, but second, I'm not sure that you can. I'm also sure that I've got some sample libraries that I've paid for that have uncleared content. I wouldn't worry about it too much. The reality is that it's not that important unless you plan to create sample libraries yourself, and, the product you buy almost certainly doesn't allow that.

Instrument manufacturers are not likely to sue someone who releases a song with their samples in them. So, whether you got those samples from the instrument, or from a sample CD, your song probably isn't going to attract the attention of anyone with standing.

Okay, that makes sense. So as a buyer or "downloader", I'm on the safe side? (And if someone complains - because a sample library is revealed as illegal -, I simply could substitute the drums of my songs?)

If I buy a sample library, I expect it to be legal. Otherwise I would need an attorney just for buying sample libraries...

[arkmabat]

Wait, so are 909 toms synthesized in real time or are they samples?

A Simmons representative told me in an email that if the SDS-5 samples were available then they would like to know the web address but that I could download them as long as they were available. The SDS-5 is all analogue I believe though, so that doesn't help much.

[Tricky-Loops]

Wait, so are 909 toms synthesized in real time or are they samples?

I'm sure that they're synthesized, aren't they?

But most of the sample libraries out there also have TR-909 samples of hi-hat, crash, ride and cymbals -- so they must be all illegal?

[Shy]

Wait, so are 909 toms synthesized in real time or are they samples?

I'm sure that they're synthesized, aren't they?

But most of the sample libraries out there also have TR-909 samples of hi-hat, crash, ride and cymbals -- so they must be all illegal?

Surely someone would argue that because the samples in the hardware's ROM sound so different than how they sound through the hardware's processing (which is the only form of them that almost everyone knows), then it's fine. Then maybe some nonsense about just what is required before you can consider a sample "modified/processed/customized/different compared to the unprocessed original" enough that it could be distributed with no worries.

[Zombie Queen]

But most of the sample libraries out there also have TR-909 samples of hi-hat, crash, ride and cymbals -- so they must be all illegal?

It's technically likely, unless they are licensed by Roland. Cakewalk (owned by Roland) have been including 909 sets in their virtual romplers, like Roland Groove Machine, that I've got bundled with Sonar. Now this function is taken by Dimension I guess, don't know as I didn't upgrade.

[Davias]

Wait, so are 909 toms synthesized in real time or are they samples?

I'm sure that they're synthesized, aren't they?

But most of the sample libraries out there also have TR-909 samples of hi-hat, crash, ride and cymbals -- so they must be all illegal?

Exactly what I asked but my post got unnoticed

[Shy]

Hmm, he wrote he was sure but then asked "aren't they?" so I guess that's not really an answer . Yes, the TR-909 toms are synthesized, no samples there.