What are considered commercial purposes (regrading EDU License)

[Hink]

But please understand you selectively quoted me using a part of my post which started "with that said" so you do understand that my post was about asking for legal advice on a forum right? Not this case which pretty much helps my point

[ghettosynth]

But please understand you selectively quoted me using a part of my post which started "with that said" so you do understand that my post was about asking for legal advice on a forum right? Not this case which pretty much helps my point

I do, but do you understand that when people are asking for advice they are generally not asking for representation, but, what a general consensus and understanding of the law is. What happened to you is unfortunate, but statistically, we can argue that following best practices will mitigate the likelihood of getting sued for copyright reasons. It probably DOES help someone to learn that commercial purposes does not necessarily mean only that you are directly earning money from the process. That is true regardless of whether you will or won't be sued and it is well covered under the discussion of best practices for non-commercial licenses.

In other words, I think that these conversations are useful in clarifying the basic letter and intent of the law, even when those sharing aren't lawyers and despite the fact that following the law doesn't mean that it won't cost you money to fight a legal battle anyway. That is, you are focusing on the "letter" of the question when I think that in a forum like this it is more the "intent" that matters.

Further, I disagree with the assertion that one should necessarily call an attorney, I think that these conversations are probably more valuable as a first draft and almost certainly cheaper than calling an attorney. My advice to just buy the commercial products is the lowest cost legal advice from a non-lawyer that will yield the best possible outcome if you are interested in pursuing commercial purposes. There is no reason to call a lawyer to find that out.

[low_low]

Further, I disagree with the assertion that one should necessarily call an attorney, I think that these conversations are probably more valuable as a first draft and almost certainly cheaper than calling an attorney. My advice to just buy the commercial products is the lowest cost legal advice from a non-lawyer that will yield the best possible outcome if you are interested in pursuing commercial purposes. There is no reason to call a lawyer to find that out.

That's how I feel about copyright registration, why pay a lawyer to file copyright registration when all they're going to do is download forms from copyright.gov, fill them out, have you sign them, submit them for processing, then charge you a fee for their time on top of the 55$us/35$us that copyright.gov charges ? I mean I agree that if you don't understand the form then talk to a lawyer, but the form is so simple to fill out, do you not know your own name ? Your own address ? What you called your song ? There's maybe two things on that form that someone could be confused about, maybe they don't know if they did it as a "work for hire" ? It's just a really simple form and process, and something a lot of artists do once, or once per quarter, or even once per month, for the work they created and want to register. Maybe someone needs a lawyer to help them understand the process, or to decide whether they want to register, but again those are pretty easy to understand and decide - do you want to pay the 55$us/35$us to register, or not ?

[low_low]

In other words, I think that these conversations are useful in clarifying the basic letter and intent of the law, even when those sharing aren't lawyers and despite the fact that following the law doesn't mean that it won't cost you money to fight a legal battle anyway. That is, you are focusing on the "letter" of the question when I think that in a forum like this it is more the "intent" that matters.

One of the reasons I feel it is so important to talk about some of these issues, especially licensing and copyright, is because there are certain things in this world that are important to learn, but that it is in almost nobodies best interest to teach you.

It is in almost nobodies best interest that artists learn more about copyright law, about protecting their rights, etc.

It is in almost nobodies best interest that artists learn about licensing their works.

Artists themselves as a community have to encourage each other to learn about these things because if they don't then nobody is going to. You'd be hard pressed to name a single player in the music industry who doesn't benefit from artists knowing LESS about copyright and licensing, in fact, you could almost go so far as to say that the entire industry runs on youth and ignorance about these subjects.

[Hink]

But please understand you selectively quoted me using a part of my post which started "with that said" so you do understand that my post was about asking for legal advice on a forum right? Not this case which pretty much helps my point

I do, but do you understand that when people are asking for advice they are generally not asking for representation, but, what a general consensus and understanding of the law is. What happened to you is unfortunate, but statistically, we can argue that following best practices will mitigate the likelihood of getting sued for copyright reasons. It probably DOES help someone to learn that commercial purposes does not necessarily mean only that you are directly earning money from the process. That is true regardless of whether you will or won't be sued and it is well covered under the discussion of best practices for non-commercial licenses.

In other words, I think that these conversations are useful in clarifying the basic letter and intent of the law, even when those sharing aren't lawyers and despite the fact that following the law doesn't mean that it won't cost you money to fight a legal battle anyway. That is, you are focusing on the "letter" of the question when I think that in a forum like this it is more the "intent" that matters.

Further, I disagree with the assertion that one should necessarily call an attorney, I think that these conversations are probably more valuable as a first draft and almost certainly cheaper than calling an attorney. My advice to just buy the commercial products is the lowest cost legal advice from a non-lawyer that will yield the best possible outcome if you are interested in pursuing commercial purposes. There is no reason to call a lawyer to find that out.

Wow...put words in my mouth much your objections are duly noted. I am still going to remind people that taking legal advoce from people online in a forum my be to their own detriment. Common sense 101 and my point is not one I intend to argue, if you dont like me saying my piece dont read it...solved

[vurt]

as i said elsewhere, i am, unless it's a criminal offence to impersonate a lawyer

It must suck to want to control someone else's behavior SO MUCH and then not be able to, huh vurt.

id imagine so. explains the name i guess.

[vurt]

as i said elsewhere, i am, unless it's a criminal offence to impersonate a lawyer

Just posting free advice around here or making money off of it?

depends, is one more likely to end up with prison time? not that i do either (does anyone consider anything i say actual "advice"?).

[rp314]

as i said elsewhere, i am, unless it's a criminal offence to impersonate a lawyer

Just posting free advice around here or making money off of it?

depends, is one more likely to end up with prison time? not that i do either (does anyone consider anything i say actual "advice"?).

I'd hesitate to speculate on something like that. Which is not to suggest that one thinks of your succinct and often witty posts as lacking in interesting insights, but there are all sorts around here at KVR...

[jancivil]

You can't be accused of acting commercially if you aren't selling any product and have made no money off of, let's be clear, the simple fact of a youtube video post with music in it. I don't know how in the world someone doesn't know if what they're doing is being commercial or not. I think everyone posting here does: are_you_making_money from it, per se. It isn't a judgement of any other aspect. You may have very commercial-seeming music that you have chosen not to do a single thing with commercially; you may have quite 'no commercial potential' music you got recorded by an entity that is ultimately distributing it in stores.

To be clear, I'm NOT saying you would get chased down for this, but it doesn't have to be money that you receive, it could be viewers, adsense, endorsement, job leads, all of that is generally speaking "commercial purposes".

If you're in it for the money, you are. If you're not, you're not.
I think the idea I was responding to regards <will you be pursued for having done>, as per topic as given. Where a student wonders if he will be for using software with a certain EULA. So the OP feels they should now ask permission.

To that, I wonder why a student's behavior is expected to fall under a different guideline than a 'non-student', or how that is defined. The student could have exactly the same goal for the use of said software as a person that hasn't been near a school in a generation. I'd like to know what vendor has done this, personally. I wouldn't want to support bullshit like that.

[low_low]

If you're in it for the money, you are. If you're not, you're not.
I think the idea I was responding to regards <will you be pursued for having done>, as per topic as given. Where a student wonders if he will be for using software with a certain EULA. So the OP feels they should now ask permission.

To that, I wonder why a student's behavior is expected to fall under a different guideline than a 'non-student', or how that is defined. The student could have exactly the same goal for the use of said software as a person that hasn't been near a school in a generation. I'd like to know what vendor has done this, personally. I wouldn't want to support bullshit like that.

I'm honestly not sure what you're saying - but the reason it's different is because s/he has an educational license. It's cheaper than a regular commercial license, so it comes with restrictions. Are you saying you don't support cheaper licenses for students ?

Cubase 9.5 download for students - 339.99$us
Cubase 9.5 full version - 599.99$us

[ghettosynth]

If you're in it for the money, you are. If you're not, you're not.
I think the idea I was responding to regards <will you be pursued for having done>, as per topic as given. Where a student wonders if he will be for using software with a certain EULA. So the OP feels they should now ask permission.

To that, I wonder why a student's behavior is expected to fall under a different guideline than a 'non-student', or how that is defined. The student could have exactly the same goal for the use of said software as a person that hasn't been near a school in a generation. I'd like to know what vendor has done this, personally. I wouldn't want to support bullshit like that.

I'm honestly not sure what you're saying - but the reason it's different is because s/he has an educational license. It's cheaper than a regular commercial license, so it comes with restrictions. Are you saying you don't support cheaper licenses for students ?

Cubase 9.5 download for students - 339.99$us
Cubase 9.5 full version - 599.99$us

If the student has the same "commercial" goals then the student should buy the same "commercial" license. I think that there's a lot of confusion over why this happens in the first place. It has jack shit to do with whether students deserve cheaper license or whether companies are being altruistic, it's simply market segment based pricing. In short, they simply want to sell more licenses but they don't want to lose profit, so, they institute methods for non-students to not masquerade as students. Those methods vary quite a bit, from extensive gatekeeping to license restrictions.

Private firms have no obligation to aid in the education of the populace. It's just convenient that the lower pricing aligns with the belief that young people studying should somehow get a better deal. Convenient in the sense that it sounds much better than leading with "it's market segment based pricing."

[low_low]

If the student has the same "commercial" goals then the student should buy the same "commercial" license. I think that there's a lot of confusion over why this happens in the first place. It has jack shit to do with whether students deserve cheaper license or whether companies are being altruistic, it's simply market segment based pricing. In short, they simply want to sell more licenses but they don't want to lose profit, so, they institute methods for non-students to not masquerade as students. Those methods vary quite a bit, from extensive gatekeeping to license restrictions.

Private firms have no obligation to aid in the education of the populace. It's just convenient that the lower pricing aligns with the belief that young people studying should somehow get a better deal. Convenient in the sense that it sounds much better than leading with "it's market segment based pricing."

I'm sure they also consider that if they can get you hooked young, you'll probably keep using their products when you're actually making money. Credit Card companies do the same thing dealing with college kids, it's not like they're making a huge profit on those 1000$us credit limit cards, even though they do make more because the kids are so irresponsible at that age and many haven't learned to manage debt.

[ghettosynth]

If the student has the same "commercial" goals then the student should buy the same "commercial" license. I think that there's a lot of confusion over why this happens in the first place. It has jack shit to do with whether students deserve cheaper license or whether companies are being altruistic, it's simply market segment based pricing. In short, they simply want to sell more licenses but they don't want to lose profit, so, they institute methods for non-students to not masquerade as students. Those methods vary quite a bit, from extensive gatekeeping to license restrictions.

Private firms have no obligation to aid in the education of the populace. It's just convenient that the lower pricing aligns with the belief that young people studying should somehow get a better deal. Convenient in the sense that it sounds much better than leading with "it's market segment based pricing."

I'm sure they also consider that if they can get you hooked young, you'll probably keep using their products when you're actually making money. Credit Card companies do the same thing dealing with college kids, it's not like they're making a huge profit on those 1000$us credit limit cards, even though they do make more because the kids are so irresponsible at that age and many haven't learned to manage debt.

Of course, but, I doubt that really comes into play for simple plugins. It probably works much better for products that are widespread in the workplace, e.g., Matlab and Autocad come to mind.

[thecontrolcentre]

Am I eligible for the educational discount?

You are eligible for an educational discount if you are:
a student currently enrolled in full-time educational studies, up to advanced degree programs and older than 13 years.
a student in a part-time program that consists of 20 hours or more study time per week, or one that runs for 12 months or more. The area of studies is irrelevant.
a teacher who is currently employed full- or part-time at a school or university in any field. Part-time and private teachers must work at least 20 hours per week to qualify

Please note that if there is ever any disagreement on educational status documents, we offer a full four-week money back guarantee.

How to verify your education status:
1.Check your eligibility
2.Buy your Ableton product at the discounted price from your local music store or the Ableton web shop
3.Verify your educational status (to show us that you really are a student or teacher)
4.Install and authorize your software