Emulator X3?

[ChamomileShark]

I should have said UVI not Falcon.

[IvyBirds]

It isn’t included with Falcon, but you can buy this separately and works with the free UVI Workstation.
https://www.uvi.net/en/vintage-synth/em ... -plus.html

Only it's not, it includes some drum samples and licensed samples from OMI libraries “Universe of Sounds” volumes 1 and 2. Which was a 3rd party sound library

E3 contains all the samples from the Proteus line that came out much later and were the IP of E-mu itself not a 3rd party

[Examigan]

I didn’t mean it’s just like Emulator X3, but it’s just a nice collection of sounds from those old units.

[IvyBirds]

Creative owns the X3 software they can legally sell it or license it to anyone they want, along with all of E-MU's IP including the sample libraries

I think the IP for the sample libraries is now owned by Digital Sound Factory, I may be wrong though.

My guess is that there isn't much will either way. Arturia already have their EII and Falcon have Emulation+ ..the libraries they don't include, the Emax, E4, Vintage Keyboards and the various proteus modules are available legally from DSF in various formats.

That sort of leaves X3 itself which I would think has a minority interest.

But what would I know?

DSF doesn't own it, they licensed it from Creative

The Arturia V collection has vintage samplers, vintage analog Synths, vintage FM, vintage hybrid Synths, pianos, organs, string machines, mellotrons, etc

What it doesn't have is a Rompler of any kind and the X3 would give them that along with all of the Proteus presets and samples

And unlike what you get with the Kontact library from DSF you actually would get the proteus synth engine itself and the Z plane filter not just samples from it. The Proteus rack units are very different from the much earlier E-II sampler and the rest of the E-MU 1980s products.

It very low hanging fruit that would require minimal effort and expense

[whyterabbyt]

Why would Lawyers object to Creative the company who owns the ashes of E-MU making money by licensing it to Arturia?

Who said lawyers would object? I sure didnt.

I said it wouldnt be simple. Im not sure why that was hard for you to understand.

Creative owns the X3 software they can legally sell it or license it to anyone they want, along with all of E-MU's IP including the sample libraries

Yes, or they can not legally sell it or license it. Your assumption that its 'simple' doesnt constitute an actual likelihood that they will, let alone to Arturia.

[IvyBirds]

Why would Lawyers object to Creative the company who owns the ashes of E-MU making money by licensing it to Arturia?

Who said lawyers would object? I sure didnt.

I said it wouldnt be simple. Im not sure why that was hard for you to understand.

Gee maybe because that's not what you said? You said

I doubt it. Because lawyers.

Not seeing where you said it wouldn't be "simple"

[whyterabbyt]

Gee maybe because that's not what you said?

and yet it was.

and remains so, despite your handwaving away your bullshit about me claiming 'lawyers would object.'

Lets see it again.

This would be so simple for a company like Arturia to licence from Creative

I doubt it. Because lawyers.

that's you saying it would be 'so simple', and my response saying I doubted that.

got it yet? you said simple, i said not. too hard for you?

Not seeing where you said it wouldn't be "simple"

Then look properly. And feel free to quote the bit where I said 'lawyers would object' why dont you.

[IvyBirds]

Gee maybe because that's not what you said?

and yet it was.

and remains so, despite your handwaving away your bullshit about me claiming 'lawyers would object.'

Again I ask why would Lawyers object to Creative licensing their IP?

Rather than attack me, lie about your previous statements and throw a temper tantrum why not act like an actual adult and state your reasons

You know actual facts but just childish things dripping with deliberate ambiguity

Looking for actual facts, not just baseless accusations or theories

You seem hell bent to start an argument with me, while I am happy to have an adult conversation based on actual facts, if you want to continue to throw a temper tantrum then have fun

[whyterabbyt]

Again I ask why would Lawyers object to Creative licensing their IP?

Ask someone who said lawyers would object, because I sure as hell didnt, as Ive already said.

And stop pretending I did.

Rather than attack me, lie about your previous statements and throw a temper tantrum
why not act like an actual adult and state your reasons

I didnt attack you, I corrected your false assertions when you claimed I didnt say what I actually said. You're the one who lied about my previous statements as Ive already proven quote easily, and you're the one throwing a temper tantrum.

You said something would be simple, I disagreed. Deal with that, and grow up.

I am happy to have an adult conversation based on actual facts

Every reply you've made to me in this thread serves as evidence to prove otherwise. You're in a childish strop because I disagreed with your assertion that something was simple, end of story.

Actual fact : Legal negotiations over the sale of IP are not inherently 'simple' and especially not just because you say they will be.

[Dantes1975]

Давайте упростим вопрос. Можно ли сейчас использовать Emulator® X3 в коммерческих целях. Да или нет. Коротко и с небольшими пояснениями.

[Tj Shredder]

Let's simplify the question. Can Emulator® X3 be used for commercial purposes right now? Yes or no. Keep it short and add a few explanations.

You could have translated it with deepl yourself…