Kontakt 6 / 7 to SFZ or Decent Sampler: The Fast and Convenient Online Solution You've Been Searching For!

[Cyforce]

I think it totally ok to rip cds/vinyls and freely spread mp3s or upload music on Youtube.

Well... if you think it is totally ok - think about that, this music is still the intellectual property of the artist (and or the label), and someone who probably earns his core income for paying food, rent etc - by making music - loses legal sales = income ... by that mentality. So counter-question, would YOU be totally ok, if someone steals a part or the complete monthly paycheck you receive from your work/employer? .... I guess not!

Because of all the new advances in AI-tech etc., anyone a few years from now can create their own great plugins just by asking AI to write the code, design the GUI etc. There's already now free AI plugins to clone analog gear almost 1:1 - GuitarML Proteus being a prime example of this. ...

Then you should hope (or pray), that your job (in case you are not working in the sound industry) will not be eaten by AI. Look on soooo many graphic artists in the last year, how will hire an artist for artwork or a specific graphic illustration these days, after stable-diffusion / midjourney etc doing that for basically some bucks or free? ... nearly no one anymore?

Maybe your euphoria about the "good new & promising" options provided by AI in the near future lets you forget about empathy towards people, who will lose their jobs by that... and with that, a lot of creativity and good inspiring work will be lost.

I do have empathy for sample library creators but I still think it is ok to be able to easily convert between formats, those rebranding the product and selling it as their own library are doing the unethical part not us users who already have the original.

So your empathy is - sample library creator`s products are now easier(!) to abuse or steal? Great emphaty...
Ever thought about a very critical point in the whole format discussion? Of some developers maybe prefer or even design a product specific for only one format, for reasons? Like branding, or user-group targeting, or keeping support work lower (because it can eat time....) or other reasons? ...

Because i ready so much of that and it bothers me...
This ist only true as far as those parts of an EULA are within the law.
Image if your respective country does not even acknowledge IP.
Or,as is sometimes the case ,If the law grants certain rights to licensees which the EULA tries to take away.
Does that Law have to be changed to fit the EULA? Or the other way around if push comes to shove?

It`s way more complex... imaging this: a sample library creator/sound design lives in France, he uses his EULA, someone violates it, but lives in Thailand - so what now? Does the law of the creator living in France fully apply? Or the law`s in Thailand, or both? Or coming additional laws based on the European union (since france is part of it) on top? ...

But still, an EULA is kind of a contract. If a developer clear states - if you purchase my product, you accept my EULA ... this is not irrelevant!

Where's empathy for sound library developers?

Rarely to be found... this topic shows it quite well. Some people are happy about a tool, for more formats. At the same time, this tool violates laws, and opens up easy access for many, to abuse/extract etc other people's work - and still, some people think it`s fine. Equal to the quote above of uploading stuff to Youtube, which is copyrighted, and by that, stealing someone a part of his income...

Maybe some people should put themselves in a short thought, like "How would I feel, if it would affect me - the negative outcomes of this"... maybe then, there would be a bit more empathy. Some grouse about NI`s upgrade prices, or products not getting supported anymore, but don`t see the reasons behind that, because it`s easier to grouse. But high workload times, for keeping old plugins working fine in every DAW, which are constantly changing plugin behavior and creating bugs, that are not caused by the plugin itself, but need to get fixed... or worktime load for bigger upgrades can be the same as big as for the complete initial product, and so giving an upgrade a price, to cover the extra expensive for it...

Srsly... think a bit more, before grousing around.
Don`t forget one essential thing: plugin developers, sample library creators, and sound designers are always, the whole time already in a bad spot due to product piracy. Constantly. Even have extra expenses to reduce the very negative impact of it.

(Some people are sooo perky, they steal your stuff, modify it very very little - and try to sell it back to you... as their "own" work, even if it consists of 95% of your own content)

[sin night]

I’m not a lawyer, but I see some possible issues by reverse engineering the Kontakt proprietary dociment file format. Regardless of the EULA (which has to stand in court), I’d consult a teams of lawyers before starting or, at least, I would consult them before using any of the finding of the reverse engineering.

On one hand, I think there should be no problem in reverse engineering a document file format (as long as you don’t decompile any app!), I believe the MS Office file format is a good example (with widespread support outside of MS applications); on the other hand, as far as I know Kontakt supports scripting for the libraries, so maybe you would access to some executable code saved inside the Kontakt patches (and maybe you need it to make sense out of the samples or to decode certain details? I don’t know). Anyway, when you start dealing with code, things may get more risky in my opinion (what’s the license for that code, for example?).

If a library has some custom scripts, someone could argue that you’re not just paying the royalties for some recordings, but you’re effectively licensing some software because the “document” contains also some executable… I don’t know if such argument would stand a chance in court, but it looks risky to me.


The big issue, anyway, is the possible uses of the software. If you use it to convert some patches you made (if you don’t have the wave samples anymore… I don’t see many other reasons), I think it’s not a big deal (regardless of what any EULA says); but if you are going to convert a third party library (either by NI or someone else), the situation is quite different, especially if the developer opted for the Kontakt proprietary format and decided against providing any unencrypted wave file (the devs may have some good reasons for that choice… or maybe not, but devs are free to make their own choices, as long as they are within the law).


Then there’s the online factor: you have to trust the service provider that anything you upload will be used only for your format conversion request.
And, anyway, unless it’s a patch/library you built from scratch, you’re uploading someone’s else work, a work that you accepted to license at certain conditions. But you’re not asking the online service to accept those conditions (and usually you’re not allowed to sublicense, anyway)… my fear is this could put a final user in a “risky” situation, even if the service handles everything in an impeccable way, because of the uploading.


As I said, I’m not a lawyer, but I work in IT and this is one of those situations when I would involve the legal team for a study before doing anything. Maybe some of my thinking has no basis / it’s wrong, but I wpuld be bery cautios when dealing with something like this.

Actually, I’m not against having access to the specs of the way data is saved (even by reverse engineering, if required); interoperability is important… but it has to be handled properly and avoid any new misuse/abuse (or a grow of them)… you don’t want to be the responsible of any new violation (or growth of those violations). I think it’s better to be safe than sorry in a scenario like this…

Just my 2 vents.

[Uncle E]

"We had a error converting your file, please try again"

2 out of 2 failed. These were NKI's I created pre-Kontakt 6. When there is a Mac version that converts older NKI's, I will buy.

[moss]

"We had a error converting your file, please try again"

2 out of 2 failed. These were NKI's I created pre-Kontakt 6. When there is a Mac version that converts older NKI's, I will buy.

Just use ConvertWithMoss: https://www.mossgrabers.de/Software/Con ... hMoss.html
Free and runs locally on your computer.

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

I think it totally ok to rip cds/vinyls and freely spread mp3s or upload music on Youtube.

Well... if you think it is totally ok - think about that, this music is still the intellectual property of the artist (and or the label), and someone who probably earns his core income for paying food, rent etc - by making music - loses legal sales = income ... by that mentality. So counter-question, would YOU be totally ok, if someone steals a part or the complete monthly paycheck you receive from your work/employer? .... I guess not!

Because of all the new advances in AI-tech etc., anyone a few years from now can create their own great plugins just by asking AI to write the code, design the GUI etc. There's already now free AI plugins to clone analog gear almost 1:1 - GuitarML Proteus being a prime example of this. ...

Then you should hope (or pray), that your job (in case you are not working in the sound industry) will not be eaten by AI. Look on soooo many graphic artists in the last year, how will hire an artist for artwork or a specific graphic illustration these days, after stable-diffusion / midjourney etc doing that for basically some bucks or free? ... nearly no one anymore?

Maybe your euphoria about the "good new & promising" options provided by AI in the near future lets you forget about empathy towards people, who will lose their jobs by that... and with that, a lot of creativity and good inspiring work will be lost.

I do have empathy for sample library creators but I still think it is ok to be able to easily convert between formats, those rebranding the product and selling it as their own library are doing the unethical part not us users who already have the original.

So your empathy is - sample library creator`s products are now easier(!) to abuse or steal? Great emphaty...
Ever thought about a very critical point in the whole format discussion? Of some developers maybe prefer or even design a product specific for only one format, for reasons? Like branding, or user-group targeting, or keeping support work lower (because it can eat time....) or other reasons? ...

I fully understand that some are passionate and have skills when it comes to creating sample libraries and even want to make a living of this.

I just don't see what the problem is if I have bought several Kontakt libraries and would like to convert some of these to the Decent Sampler format to use on my iPad for personal use only? No harm done.

To make a copy of something I've bought is not to steal/abuse.

The reason I mentioned that others might share their converted libraries, much like mp3s are being shared, was more from a realistic point of view and not so much an ethical. It is inevitable that converted libraries would be shared.

Once again if converting was done in a systematic way just to have sample library creators lose sales that would totally different than personal use.

Here are my thoughts on AI from another thread:

Also the first people behind developing AI can't be said to be people with good intentions. First they where closely tied to the military and nothing but military.

I also see this now about a heavyweight at MIT, Marvin Minsky, known as “father of artificial intelligence”:

Epstein was at MIT for Marvin Minsky’s memorial 
According to an email from Media Lab cofounder Nicholas Negroponte, Epstein’s closest friend at MIT was AI pioneer Marvin Minsky, who “even visited him in jail.” Today’s report showed that Epstein had donated $100,000 to Minsky in 2002, several years before his 2008 conviction. Nevertheless, Minsky has posthumously become associated with the Epstein scandal. In a deposition unsealed last August, Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre said that Epstein forced her to have sex with Minsky. Source: https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/0 ... ng-ethics/

So no wonder AI is already used now mostly for manipulating, cheating, stealing, scamming. Unethical people will have a blast thanks to AI.

On the other hand:
*We could use AI to send water-drones to help out during droughts around the world.
*We could have AI-robots learn agriculture and grow fruit, vegetables, mushrooms and medicinal plants.
*We could set up greenhouses being ran by robots on every corner in every city/town where the food grown is 100 % FREE to each and everyone and open 24/7.
*We could use AI robots to cleanse the seas and remove plastic, prescription drugs and other stuff found in our drinking water 24/7.
We could do great things that benefit all and everyone.

But instead we marvel at manipulative stuff like voice cloning, generating pictures of people that don't exist, deep fakes etc. like it is really amazing.
Don't get me wrong it can be fun with these things mentioned in the light of comedy/parody but that's not really helping people all over the world.

Countless billions of money invested in AI and I've yet to see how anything will really benefit us all.

Would you call that ”euphoria about the "good new & promising" options provided by AI”???

[sin night]

It is inevitable that converted libraries would be shared.

Which is one of the reasons (maybe the main reason?) for using the Kontakt proprietary file format instead of providing the wave files.


While I suspect the majority of the devs couldn’t be much bothered if you convert a library you bought and you keep it strictly for your personal use to play it another sampler, they may still have some serious concerns about a tool that, as a “side effect”, is removing a “layer of protection” from their work and enables easy copy/repackaging of the core of their work, which can then be redistributed (not legally, of course!), maybe even into competing products.


For NI, it’s probably also a matter of keeping the value of their sampler (vendor lock-in?), of course… but that’s a whole different subject.


Also, if a library is available only in Kontakt format and requires the user to input a serial in order to work, providing a tool that enables to extract the content of that library means bypassing the licensing / copy protection in place.
I wonder if that’s enough to cause some legal troubles…

[egbert101]

Maybe people are just 'naive' or just 'ignorant'. There is of course no problem making copies of anything unless it's against the law. The existence of copyright is there for a reason and it is the law.

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

Maybe people are just 'naive' or just 'ignorant'. There is of course no problem making copies of anything unless it's against the law. The existence of copyright is there for a reason and it is the law.

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

Yes, that is why the very first thing I wrote was the following:

Well there is one type of copyright I endorse and another type I reject.

Endorse the type of copyright that protect artists from anyone using their musical ideas.
Reject that making copies or even to distribute these in a new format is somehow wrong.

[egbert101]

It's not about ethics it's about law. I actually agree that in an ideal world, we would all share things together for free. But we don't live in an ideal world.

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

It's not about ethics it's about law. I actually agree that in an ideal world, we would all share things together for free. But we don't live in an ideal world.

I know we don't live in an ideal world since the law itself, as you mentioned, is hardly based on ethics(!), The first copyright law in the US, the Copyright Act, was in year 1790.
Slavery was only abolished 1865…

[Etienne1973]

It's not about ethics it's about law.

IMO ethical considerations are part of and should be even more involved because in the digital domain (internet) the grip of law in regard intellectual property is depending on where servers are located.

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

My point is that laws based on so-called ”rights” have very little, to nothing, to do with ethics.

Some people want the ”right/freedom” to do really stupid things like burn religious scriptures etc., but it is still unethical and vulgar to provoke people that way(!)

Laws based on actual ethics would really bring about ideal conditions.

Someone like the Buddha who transcended all realms of existence and remembered eons of countless universes expanding and contracting
had very strict rules for monks and nuns
yet would allow them to smoke cannabis…

But some law makers around the world think they know better!

[Etienne1973]

It's not about ethics it's about law. I actually agree that in an ideal world, we would all share things together for free. But we don't live in an ideal world.

I know we don't live in an ideal world since the law itself, as you mentioned, is hardly based on ethics(!), The first copyright law in the US, the Copyright Act, was in year 1790.
Slavery was only abolished 1865…

Hand on heart. What has Slavery (sad and ugly) to do with Copyright?

[Yadrichik_Chaya]

It's not about ethics it's about law. I actually agree that in an ideal world, we would all share things together for free. But we don't live in an ideal world.

I know we don't live in an ideal world since the law itself, as you mentioned, is hardly based on ethics(!), The first copyright law in the US, the Copyright Act, was in year 1790.
Slavery was only abolished 1865…

Hand on heart. What has Slavery (sad and ugly) to do with Copyright?

That in year 1790 in the USA copyright laws were made while slavery was still considered legal. Only 75 years later was slavery considered against the law…

So the very people who thought copyright was a VERY important thing at the same time had no problems at all when it came to the greatest crime ever against humanity!

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of law makers.

[egbert101]

Meanwhile back in 2023, copyright is still the law.