Legality of distributing sampled synths

[thecontrolcentre]

Does this also mean that if he sells his MO8 he'll have to delete his nki's?

No ... he just can't re-distribute them.

Then he can lend me his workstation, and I can legally sample the patches I like for my own use, but it would be illegal for him to send me his nki's? Makes no sense to me.

I suppose that would work ... it's hardly the same as sharing digital copies of the samples. You would be creating your own version of the nki too.

tbh In the real world, if your mate wanted to share his MO8 samples with you, for your own use, then I doubt Yamaha would care. But if he puts them online, or offers them for sale ... that's something else.

[fmr]

Does this also mean that if he sells his MO8 he'll have to delete his nki's?

No ... he just can't re-distribute them.

Then he can lend me his workstation, and I can legally sample the patches I like for my own use, but it would be illegal for him to send me his nki's? Makes no sense to me.

Copyright laws are plainly stupid in some aspects. But is the law, and we can't argue against the law. Only thing we can do is fight to have it changed - but this demands lots of resources, including money.

[bbaggins]

Good questions. It makes sense that I can legally sample my own synth because I've already paid for the samples, and transferring those sounds to disk is no different from using them in a recording. But have I crossed a legal line if I subsequently sell that synth?

I'm still unclear as to how recording a series of notes and then subsequently re-ordering them to create a song is fundamentally different from recording the same notes directly into a song.

[thecontrolcentre]

It's not about whether you sample the synth ... the illegality is around re-distribution of those (copyrighted) sampled sounds. You can sample anything you like for your own use.

[Meffy]

Good questions. It makes sense that I can legally sample my own synth because I've already paid for the samples, and transferring those sounds to disk is no different from using them in a recording. But have I crossed a legal line if I subsequently sell that synth?

I'm still unclear as to how recording a series of notes and then subsequently re-ordering them to create a song is fundamentally different from recording the same notes directly into a song.

Since asking a bunch of random musicians in an online forum for legal advice isn't clearing things up very well, maybe it would be better to ask a lawyer with expertise in these areas.

Here you'll get good advice and bad, well-intentioned and... otherwise. Picking what's right and what's wrong is about as difficult as guessing the answer yourself without consulting anyone else.

[izonin]

You have two black boxes with keyboards. One of them is a Rhodes, the other one is a digital physically modeled electric piano. You sample both of them, not knowing which one's real. How do you know which sample lib it's legal to share?

If you ask the company, whether you can sample their instruments, they will say no. Rhodes, Wurlitzer, Steinway, Yamaha, Roland... they have all put lots of effort to create a unique sound. So why should it matter if it's a digital instrument or not?

[whyterabbyt]

You have two black boxes with keyboards. One of them is a Rhodes, the other one is a digital physically modeled electric piano. You sample both of them, not knowing which one's real. How do you know which sample lib it's legal to share?

They both are.

So why should it matter if it's a digital instrument or not?

It doesnt. It only matters if it relies on someone else's recordings. As has been said quite a few times already. Reread the thread maybe?

[izonin]

Physically modeled instruments use recordings, too.

[thecontrolcentre]

You have two black boxes with keyboards. One of them is a Rhodes, the other one is a digital physically modeled electric piano. You sample both of them, not knowing which one's real. How do you know which sample lib it's legal to share?

[thecontrolcentre]

Physically modeled instruments use recordings, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_m ... _synthesis

[whyterabbyt]

Physically modeled instruments use recordings, too.

Erm, no. That's why they call it 'physical modelling' not 'not particularly physical sample playback'.

[izonin]

Anyway, replace the 'physically modeled' with 'hybrid'. Would it make a difference?

[Rock Hardbuns]

Given that wee are talking about a fairly new synth it may have come with a license agreement. If so, it should probably be adhered to.

It doesnt. It only matters if it relies on someone else's recordings. As has been said quite a few times already. Reread the thread maybe?

We've been over this before without progress, but I'll give my spiel again:

If you consider the rompler as a recording device (which is fair enough, granted) there is nothing that gives you permission to use it for making music either. (Unless you actually have such a contract.)

There is nothing in the Berne convention that delineates between different kinds of use, and I have yet to find any court-cases on the matter (though I'd really really like to see some).

Therefor all arguments regarding intent and use are irrelevant. As far as the law is concerned re-sampling and music are the same thing.

Thus:

It makes a lot more sense, to consider sample sets analogous to fonts, where copyright applies to a collection as a whole, but not to the individual elements.

[Whizz_Bomb]

The manual for this synth clearly states that the samples can only be used for personal use. You effectively have a license to use them for your own non-commercial activities. You cannot distribute them whether for financial gain, or not.

The samples are owned by Yamaha, or they may have licensed them from someone else (but if they did they would have paid for a commercial license where they can distribute them). Consequently, you do not own them, and have no right to take them and sell them.

Whenever you buy any commercial sample library, or synth with samples in it, there will be terms and conditions or a license somewhere that specifically spells out what you can and cannot do with the samples. Look for it to find out what your rights are. The chances are you will not be allowed to distribute the samples themselves, whether for financial gain or not. It will possibly point out that you may create musical works with the samples, which you may be able to sell commercially. Some require you to purchase a separate commercial license to even do this.

These large companies do search for people selling their samples, and will take some form of legal action against you. It is not worth it. These companies spend a fortune developing these products, and will protect their copyright material.

In many jurisdictions there are also issues in criminal law regarding the selling of other people's copyright material on a commercial scale, whether that be dvds, music files, or samples (which are digital recordings). You could be arrested and prosecuted, because the law actually considers this to be not far off of theft.

Most people find the law on this area rather confusing, and find it far too strict; however, this is what it is. I make music in my spare time, but have a law degree, and have worked for a law firm. I have been involved in some IP disputes, so have an idea of what I am talking about. If you want to take a risk, at least let it be an informed decision.

[bbaggins]

The manual for this synth clearly states that the samples can only be used for personal use. You effectively have a license to use them for your own non-commercial activities.

I had to go look this up and verify that's what it says, as it sounds overly restrictive. Sure enough, this is what it says:

This product incorporates and bundles computer programs and contents in which Yamaha owns copyrights or with respect to which it has license to use others' copyrights. Such copyrighted materials include, without limitation, all computer software, style files, MIDI files, WAVE data, musical scores and
sound recordings. Any unauthorized use of such programs and contents outside of personal use is not permitted under relevant laws. Any violation of copyright has legal consequences. DON'T MAKE, DISTRIBUTE OR USE ILLEGAL COPIES.

Copying of the commercially available musical data including but not limited to MIDI data and/or audio data is strictly prohibited except for your personal use.

I could not find any mention of "non-commercial". Whew. That means I can still get paid to play it!

Still, the text is surprising. It sounds as though Yamaha is forbidding me from, say, renting out the synthesizer.

(BTW, I have no intention of selling these samples. However, it would be nice to be able to install them on some friends' DAWs (friends who have previously paid me to play said synthesizer on their records) to save dragging a 50-lb box around. That was what inspired this thread.)