Viper｜1.2.2 update with bugfixes and new skin

[Roman Wisniak]

Adam, maybe propose a partnership? Maybe there can be a mutually beneficial arrangement that can be made, you would get resources, further develop using their support, work out arrangements with profits, and in turn, it could really boost sales for both parties? I mean, you would sort of work for them as a Dev. Its a dying product, they literally have nothing to lose, and a ton to gain

+1

[goldenanalog]

Adam, maybe propose a partnership? Maybe there can be a mutually beneficial arrangement that can be made, you would get resources, further develop using their support, work out arrangements with profits, and in turn, it could really boost sales for both parties? I mean, you would sort of work for them as a Dev. Its a dying product, they literally have nothing to lose, and a ton to gain

+1

+1

[adamszabo]

I really dont know about any partnership. How would that work? I dont think they would give me any of their source code, everything I have done in Viper I wrote from scratch analyzing wave recordings. They are first and foremost a hardware company and not software, and I work in FlowStone, they probably program in c++ or assembly for the motorola chips. Also, Viper is a different product with my own visions, I wouldnt want someone telling me which direction it should go. Then there are a thousand other questions that are way to complex to answer, so I dont think a partnership is something they or I want to do.

[BONES]

Wow! I had no idea you had done Viper in Flowstone. Wow! What a great advertisement it is for the platform. Is JP6K also done in Flowstone? It leaves all my years of SynthEdit noodling for dead.

[plrdmus]

I really dont know about any partnership. How would that work?

Hmm. Maybe... an online converter that only works for registered Virus owners?
Or maybe some tool that sound designers can use to distribute their soundbanks on Viper too?

That would be the safer options. Although I still don't get why making a converter might be illegal. Sure they won't like it, but... can they really do anything?

[goldenanalog]

I really dont know about any partnership. How would that work?

Hmm. Maybe... an online converter that only works for registered Virus owners?
Or maybe some tool that sound designers can use to distribute their soundbanks on Viper too?

Excellent suggestions, plrdmus! +1!

[vertibration]

I really dont know about any partnership. How would that work?

Hmm. Maybe... an online converter that only works for registered Virus owners?
Or maybe some tool that sound designers can use to distribute their soundbanks on Viper too?

That would be the safer options. Although I still don't get why making a converter might be illegal. Sure they won't like it, but... can they really do anything?

This might be a better option Adam. U-he has a prophet 5 converter for Repro, no issues there. You dont have to call it an Access Virus converter, just call it a Viper converter. Leave their name out of it altogether. I think he is right, what can they do?

[plrdmus]

Then I got a quote from the license agreement which I will be able to quote:

"Quote from our software license agreement:

Limitations on Reverse Engineering, Decompilation, and Disassembly.
You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation."

Thats a shame, I was really looking forward to this. But what I dont understand is that I wont "reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble" anything, I am using the freely available info in the manuals to read the .mid files.

Hold up.

the copyright in a computer program cannot be infringed where, as in the present case, the lawful acquirer of the licence did not have access to the source code of the computer program to which that licence relates, but merely studied, observed and tested that program in order to reproduce its functionality in a second program.
All this means that as long as you only reverse engineer a program by doing experiments and observe how it functions, you are probably on the right side of the law. It doesn't matter if the license agreement says that you aren't allowed to do so, because such a requirement is null and void (unenforceable) according to the law in the EU

Source: https://vidstromlabs.com/blog/the-legal ... in-the-eu/

The “idea” is protected through the “expression of the idea”, i.e. in the functionality of the source code. But only the source code is protected, not the idea itself. Indeed, as was stated in the SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd case:

…to accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected by copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to the detriment of technological progress and industrial development…

Therefore, in line with this concept, low-level reverse engineering methods such as testing and observation are legal because they don’t threaten the work and intellectual property of software creators. Higher-level reverse engineering such as decompilation is illegal as it is a threat to the ideas and intellectual property of the software creators via recreating the source code, which is the protected element. However, decompilation for interoperability testing is legal and necessary to protect consumers and competition.

Source: https://www.gerrishlegal.com/legal-blog ... e-software

Conclusions
1. It is possible to reproduce “principles” or “ideas” of other people’s software programs.
2. It is possible to get revenues from others’ “principles” or “ideas,” because they are not copyrightable.
3. Legal fora are not the right place where to defend “principles” or “ideas” because no legal paradigm protects them.
4. European courts may intervene only if the program code itself is copied.
5. The source code of any program can be studied, without any permission of the licensor for “study” purposes

Abstract: https://slideshare.net/DanielRusso5/rev ... erspective

And again... Viper is a completely different product, that works on a different way.

[BONES]

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is morally right and there are all manner of possible pitfalls if you are not careful e.g. You could use the similarity between the way JP6K mimics the supersaw controls in TI to suggest that what Adam has done goes beyond the scope of the exemption you have cited. The simple test is to decide how you would feel if someone did to you what you want to do to someone else. Would you be happy to have someone else steal your lifetime of hard work and make money off it? I'm damned sure I wouldn't, therefore I wouldn't think of doing it to someone else.

[seren animation]

Business has nothing to do with morality.

[plrdmus]

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is morally right and there are all manner of possible pitfalls if you are not careful e.g. You could use the similarity between the way JP6K mimics the supersaw controls in TI to suggest that what Adam has done goes beyond the scope of the exemption you have cited. The simple test is to decide how you would feel if someone did to you what you want to do to someone else. Would you be happy to have someone else steal your lifetime of hard work and make money off it? I'm damned sure I wouldn't, therefore I wouldn't think of doing it to someone else.

Except the products aren't the same.
Virus is one thing. Has hardware. Has knobs. Has buttons you can press.
Viper doesn't, and it will never run on "real hardware" or as a standalone product.

Personally, I don't find Virus useful for me anymore, because it's very unconvenient. You have a limited amount of outputs. Fiddling around with its drivers can be painful. And you'll never see a more powerful version unless the code is rewritten to run on newer chipsets. (Last version was released almost 11 years ago now)

Viper, however, has a similar sound. It works, and without the downsides of using external hardware. And has the ability to import custom wavetables.

Needless to say that you miss the "fun" of having some knobs you can touch and move. That's something you'll never be able to mimic just with software, even with a midi controller.
If you want that, you can get a Virus Ti, with its downsides.

At this point, I still think that Kemper Audio has pretty much moved on. But nothing stops them to release a Virus VST Plugin if they really wanted.

Business has nothing to do with morality.

It sometimes does, though.

[AnX]

ppl need to accept Viper for what it is, not keep bitching about what it isnt

it's never going to be a 1:1 virus, get over it.

[BONES]

Business has nothing to do with morality.

Only because we, as a society, allow that to be the case. It should be a source of shame to us all that it is so.

Except the products aren't the same.
Virus is one thing. Has hardware. Has knobs. Has buttons you can press.
Viper doesn't, and it will never run on "real hardware" or as a standalone product.

But the heart of Virus is software, all you're talking about is the wrapping. Do you think a car company would get away with reverse engineering a rival's engine by claiming "but it's in a completely different chassis, Your Honour." I don't think they would. There is also Virus TI, which is very much about software and working inside a DAW.

Needless to say that you miss the "fun" of having some knobs you can touch and move.

I honestly don't see how that it more fun than moving the digital equivalents with a mouse.

[plrdmus]

But the heart of Virus is software, all you're talking about is the wrapping. Do you think a car company would get away with reverse engineering a rival's engine by claiming "but it's in a completely different chassis, Your Honour." I don't think they would. There is also Virus TI, which is very much about software and working inside a DAW.

The heart is software, correct. But the software here isn't the same, either. It's built on a completely different code.
The similar part? They both can take you from A to B, or at least drop you close. But even the feel is not the same. Yes, they both have an engine. Yes, they both have a steering wheel. No, they're not the same. No, they don't work the same way.
Can you fill it with the same fuel? Maybe.

Needless to say that you miss the "fun" of having some knobs you can touch and move.

I honestly don't see how that it more fun than moving the digital equivalents with a mouse.

That's on you.

[recursive one]

So: The Virus TI is an abandoned product/Access doesn’t care?

Apparently they do care but Virus TI pretty much seems an abandoned product

Luckily we have Viper

- pointing out the oft absurdity of speculation: just because the current product’s iteration may exist on soon-to-be obsolete hardware, doesn’t mean that the platform itself is dead, per se (just the current product, likely) - Access may simply be waiting for the right time; the right people; the right platform to port the code; and re-engineer.

Or:

Access as an asset - including all of its ip - might be sold to Roland/Yamaha/Korg maybe even NI - which could be extremely good for a music hardware builder.

Remember Creamware: I have a Plugiator; but I would have preferred that their ip had gone in a different direction.

I think there are currently no signs that the Virus may be developed further, Ti3 or even firmware updates adressing the bugs and compatiblity issues seem not very likely any time soon.

But if they still sell it they may hold on their IP rights just because of that.

I think it must be perfectly legal to make a software synth that works in a similar way to other hardware or even software synth (otherwise we wouldn't have about nine dozens of Minimoog emulations). But studying how the exact Virus firmware interpets the Virus own presets in order to make a software that reads the same presets might be a different thing, that's why I think it's better to ask someone who actually knows the related laws and cases (especially if Access themselves don't approve this).