No demo, refund and even NFR of some orchestral libraries - is that legal?

[murnau]

Should I bother updating my Albion 1 at the "cheap" offer? That's a much harder question to answer...

[AnX]

If there is no demo, you need to do LOTS of research before you take a gamble. Thats what it is, a gamble. Will you like it, will it work on YOUR system....

Buy in haste, repent at leisure.

No research gives you the response that something will work fluently on your system or something will work in your own compositions. Nothing will let you understand 100% except the trial in person. We can continue in competition who is clever but nobody can tell that something is capable to replace one's personal experience when we talk about tools for music making.
And yes, my fault that I make a mistake to be a part of a business where customer pay 100% of the price for a product that he has never been able to try. The customer has only one attempt but not for try but only for buy.

Indeed. Basically, why would you give someone your money on trust alone?

Its never a good idea. Learn from it, move on

[goldenhelix]

I actually sometimes wish I could sell my Albion One too. It's not that it's a bad library, but I really just don't use it. I don't like their patch structure (all strings on one patch), no real legato, extremely wet..

This is just a reality you have to live with when dealing with libraries, unfortunately. It makes research a really important part of the process. Try your best to know what you are buying. Still, you will run into situations where you do all the research in the world and still find out something you don't like once you buy the thing and start using it.

You might be interested to know that https://www.bestservice.com/index.html has a system where you can try some products remotely (I have not actually used it yet, but they describe how the process works on their site). This could be worth looking into when buying libraries in the future.

[poshook]

I actually sometimes wish I could sell my Albion One too. It's not that it's a bad library, but I really just don't use it. I don't like their patch structure (all strings on one patch), no real legato, extremely wet..

This is just a reality you have to live with when dealing with libraries, unfortunately. It makes research a really important part of the process. Try your best to know what you are buying. Still, you will run into situations where you do all the research in the world and still find out something you don't like once you buy the thing and start using it.

You might be interested to know that https://www.bestservice.com/index.html has a system where you can try some products remotely (I have not actually used it yet, but they describe how the process works on their site). This could be worth looking into when buying libraries in the future.

thnx

[shidostrife]

While I think this "mistake" was mostly on OP's lack of research (by my standard. Heck, I asked in KVR before buying a $10 library!), I do think that Kontakt Player libraries should be refundable/resellable. I mean, they have serial numbers, NI also allows transfer for their own products. If NI could trust their customers, why can't companies making libraries for NI's player, with the same DRM, do the same?

[poshook]

While I think this "mistake" was mostly on OP's lack of research (by my standard. Heck, I asked in KVR before buying a $10 library!), I do think that Kontakt Player libraries should be refundable/resellable. I mean, they have serial numbers, NI also allows transfer for their own products. If NI could trust their customers, why can't companies making libraries for NI's player, with the same DRM, do the same?

Agree and this the main point. You can make a mistake enytime without the trial even after research but developer see you as deciever even you are not

[Tj Shredder]

Isn't the main problem that you can't really copy protect a sample library? You could protect the player, but not the samples. You could still play the samples in another player. Often the players are free. The main work is creating the samples. Especially orchestral samples are a lot of effort. To map them is also work but mutch less...
If there is a pre-listen on the web site and some good demos what it is capable of, it should be sufficient to make a good decision...

[poshook]

Isn't the main problem that you can't really copy protect a sample library? You could protect the player, but not the samples. You could still play the samples in another player. Often the players are free. The main work is creating the samples. Especially orchestral samples are a lot of effort. To map them is also work but mutch less...
If there is a pre-listen on the web site and some good demos what it is capable of, it should be sufficient to make a good decision...

This is simply not truth. It is not a matter of player. You can not use samples without the license. Please tell me the difference between the sample library for Kontakt and a native plugin from Native Instruments. Without proper activation you can not use them at all no matter what DAW or sampler is used.
There are plugins where the effort of developer is huge and one plugin is developed many years of intensive work - ValhallaDSP, Klanghelm, Relab, Cytomic etc. Those plugins are either with demo or fast refund and license can be transferred. I really do not see any reason why libraries developers should use different rules. When I can not try the product why no refund (I return the license and they give the money back) or resale the license? Even marriage can be cancelled and what an effort is behind in many cases

[jancivil]

Isn't the main problem that you can't really copy protect a sample library? .

That's a no.

There is an important difference between the two main Kontakt instrument formats. Standard open-format Kontakt libraries natively have accessible sample files, editable instrument presets and do not require special installation or activation procedures. You simply need the full retail version of Native Instruments Kontakt to use them.

On the other hand, specially encoded "Powered-By-Kontakt Player" libraries have been specifically encoded and encrypted by Native Instruments to run in their more limited free Kontakt Player. The Kontakt Player is essentially a locked demo version of Kontakt. It can only read certain specially-formatted products that require activation with a serial number and the Service Center. It cannot import wav files, does not support instrument editing, cannot read any instrument presets in the open format and has several other functionality limitations. From a feature standpoint, the open format has all of the same capabilities as the Player format, with the added benefit of user access and customization support. There is also an added licensing fee, longer production time and minimum MSRP requirement for all products encoded in the Kontakt Player format. Therefore, we have found that the Player format is not as suitable for many products as the classic open format tends to be. - SOUNDIRON Help pages.

[Tj Shredder]

Thanks for the clarification. If the samples are encrypted, they are protected. I always had the feeling, that the claim Kontakt player is "free", is a false statement. As a customer you pay twice. With the full Kontakt you pay a lot for a DRM system but also get a sound developing framework. But you can't use it for GPL like developement.
I wonder if Hise hase the potential to break into that system and open the market...

[jancivil]

the claim Kontakt player is "free", is a false statement. As a customer you pay twice.

If you need more than the Kontakt player provides, you buy the full thing. If you do not, and you only need something which gives you the Player for *free* - which means for no extra money - you do not pay twice, you don't pay at all except for some content. You're making people work to correct actually false statements which are avoidable.

For instance: when Kontakt 5 was still somewhat new and I perceived no big need to upgrade, I lost my samples for a Scarbee bass product due to a hard drive failing. So all they would do for me is give me a Kontakt 5 version (I did not own K5 full, was using 4). Which works in the {Free!} Player. I never needed to get under the hood with it. When I did need the thing, I bought it.

[jancivil]

there is no "downloadable products nature".

Oh FFS, think about it. One now has something they can upload to a torrents site and give to everybody that would think to locate it. So, some feel that there is a fair likelihood that some people actually will, and once done ask for their money back.

[yellowmix]

Isn't the main problem that you can't really copy protect a sample library? .

That's a no.

Ignoring the fact that a majority of Kontakt sample libraries are not using the NI licensing protection anyway, that's a "yes".

If something is encrypted and the program you have does the decryption, you don't break the encryption. You break the program. So these libraries are torrented as-is. But you can use a modified Kontakt to decrypt them for you. Part of why there's a new Kontakt constantly is due to this arms race.

It's an impossible situation. Anything people can see or hear can be copied. There is no way to present it to people without them being to capture it. Synth plugins escape this program by being able to constantly generate unique sounds, and effect plugins escape since it's input-dependent, so anyone holding sample libraries to the same standards is disingenuous at best.

I don't like encrypted samples. That means I can't use them in other products while they're taking up gigs of space. But they can't trust me because who am I? I'm one of billions on this planet and it takes just one bad actor to ruin their product forever. So you can't take it personally. Every form of DRM, by definition, assumes you're a potential thief, including serial numbers and watermarks.

With serialed plugins you can blacklist the serial then add features and more internal copy protection and engage in the arms race. With Kontakt sample libraries, Native Instruments takes on that role so developers can spend more time making products.

Pirates cost everyone money. Developers spend time, energy, and money coding and setting up infrastructure to mitigate it. Those are resources not going into making a product better, and it's embedding costs in the product that you are ultimately paying. It's a huge problem that can't be glossed over.

[yellowmix]

I always had the feeling, that the claim Kontakt player is "free", is a false statement. As a customer you pay twice. With the full Kontakt you pay a lot for a DRM system but also get a sound developing framework. But you can't use it for GPL like developement.
I wonder if Hise hase the potential to break into that system and open the market...

What market? What sample library developer would use a platform where their samples could be "liberated"? Do you see any orchestral libraries in SF2 format that aren't based on CC or public domain samples?

Kontakt Player is free because people need a sampler program to use their third-party purchased library. That's the same situation as Best Service Engine, EastWest Play, UVI Workstation, IK's Sampletank, and every other vendor with sample-based instruments. Some of them charge you for the program (looking at you, EastWest)!

If you have Kontakt full you can certainly make a Kontakt instrument, license it under GPL, Creative Commons, or make it public domain, and distribute it as such.

There is so much ignorance in this thread it's impossible to keep up with correcting it. If you don't understand the products don't make assertions about them!

[jancivil]

Isn't the main problem that you can't really copy protect a sample library? .

That's a no.

Ignoring the fact that a majority of Kontakt sample libraries are not using the NI licensing protection anyway, that's a "yes".

The actual question as you quoted here: [isn't it that] you can't really copy protect a sample library?

And evidently you can! So the answer is no.