Copyright question

[meroveus]

And my point which I'll make short and sweet is, if you spent years building your experience, reputation, and business just to have someone come in behind and use your product for financial gain in the same field, you'd probably have a different view point.

But if they are thieves (and anyone who samples vinyl they don't own the copyright to, is a thief!), then it is ok, right? They are ripping people off, so you can rip them off, ok?

Just because you personally can't afford to do what someone else DID afford to do doesn't give you (the 'collective' you, I'm talking) the right to rip off that work.

But a lot of these ppl did NOT do any original recording, they merely copied other recordings. These are the people that tee boy is referring to.

In my opinion, this situation is like a poker game - who has the biggest balls and the most money wins the game, regardless of morals or the law.

[tee boy]

Your right Meroveus, that is the point i am making entirely. Being me, I have no intention of taking someones original material and pass it off as my own. I just think that the phonographic copyright laws are a little outdated and should be amended in some way to included 'creative' sampling. And i also think that if YOU sample illegally, YOU must be prepared to be sampled in return. Its no good creating a bunch of loops using illegal samples, then saying 'ok, i license you to use 'MY' samples how i choose'. Like you say, sound design at this level is all about who has the ball to get away with it.

With regard to my own work, I honestly do not want to create soundware in the current environment. I make many great sounds which are equally as good i feel to those found on current professional CD's, but ofcourse I know and appreciate that the some source material may be questionable (i do record about 80% original stuff). Until Im in a position to do it properly and say that all source material is 100% original, then I have no intention of releasing anything. I do think though, that for me and others like me it is a shame. We can write songs and produce music, but we cant present our sounds as entities in their own right. Why? Because we couldnt afford to record original source material, so we used a 'convenience' (with no creative merit) sample instead. I dont feel bad about this, because i know that the merit of the resulting sample is the creative manipulation which has gone into its generation. I dont consider this to be the same i any way to passing off someone elses work as my own.

I really do wish that people would see sound design for the musical art it is, rather than just a quick buck. Maybe then attitudes towards sampling might change. Lets face it, sound design in this context is the creation of timbre and texture, just as composition is the creation of melody, harmony and rhythm. It is as valid a form of musical expression for me as anything i write on notation. But unfortunately, I dont have the 'balls' (as in the balls to release it illegally, even though i would get away with it) or the finance (to do it legally)to share this stuff.


But hey, thats just my little cent's worth on he topic. Im in full knowledge of the 'rules' and I adhere to them, just as i do other rules im not in 100% agreement with. What Devon is saying is correct and definately the simple answer, if a little closed minded. And for anyone considering releasing illegal soundware, its definately good advice.

[DevonB]

What Devon is saying is correct and definately the simple answer, if a little closed minded. And for anyone considering releasing illegal soundware, its definately good advice.

Again, I only speak from the point of making a profit for business purposes. For writing your own music, and using it a musical context, my views are a bit different. Use whatever you want, but at least get permission from the author and site what you used. That way right there, you have artistic freedom.

Devon

[HHaynes]

Read any EULA from a sample maker and the answer will be crystal clear. Resampling of sampled material is in almost every case a contravention of copyright, unless the license issuer (the original sample developer) gives that specific right to their users.

I can chop, grind, layer, mutilate and otherwise change samples I've purchased (or more accurately, licensed) as long as the end result is an original creative work of some sort - be it music or sound design. But if I took that creation and created a loop library or another set of multi-samples, I'd open myself up to a lawsuit in a flash - in almost every case.

Be smart. Don't look for answers in a discussion forum. There are no lawyers and few sample developers that will discuss this with you. If you look at EULAs for just about any sample library, you will most likely find a provision in there that PROHIBITS you from doing what you suggest.

[tee boy]

HHaynes,
You are absolutely correct! Our beef though, is that much of this soundware that were are being licensed to use is not even theirs to lience. They sampled it themselves without permission, so in what way do they have any right to control how it is used, let alone make money from it? Sample CD's like Houseworx are big selling products, yet id be supprise if there was one legal sample on the disk. But ofcourse, if i used anything off that CD as source material for my own sounds, I'd be liable to get in trouble. Basically, its bollocks!