Using products to create products

[Consona]

Just wondering how does this work... using various products to make your own commercial sample library/sound pack/etc.


Sample Libs: Read some license agreements and overall, you can't use sample libraries to make your own products.

DAWs: You can use daws to make your own products.

VST Synths: I assume you can use VI synths to make your own synth patches collection and sell it. But can you sample a VI synth and make a kontakt lib out of that for example?

Hardware Synths: How does this work? Can you sample any synth and sell those samples? Or do you need some agreement from the manufacturer or something?

VST effects: Can you use vst plugins, like various Waves or Fabfilter saturators, compressors and whatnot, on your samples and then sell those?

VST synths/effects: Can you put your samples into Steinberg's Padshop or Izotope's Iris, effect them, and then sell that?

Click to read more...

 

[Daryl]

The underlying principle is that any original products that use actual recordings are not allowed to be used to make another sample product. Over and above that it is a rather grey and murky situation.

The main issue for using hardware synths is that you generally can't use the name of the synth in your marketing, particularly if there is an active Trademark.

 

[iMovieShout]

You will find that most if not all, sample libraries contracts / terms & conditions of sale will expressly state that you are not the owner of the samples and are just a licensee. When you buy a library, you are in fact only buying the right to use the library, and not ownership of the library. As such the vendor / owner can revoke your license and even pursue legal action against you if they find you have used their samples or sample libraries to create your own samples that are intended to be marketed or sold as your own libraries. The bigger studios such as CineSamples, Spitfire Audio, VSL, Native Instruments, etc, etc, etc are all very clear on this. Its a big no no.
If you want to create your own sample libraries to sell, then you will need to create them from scratch using actual instruments etc. Using synths etc is also fine, but as mentioned previously / above its legally very risky to quote actual synth names in marketing and branding unless you have the prior permission of the brand owner (ie. the manufacturer of the synths).
Hope that helps.

 

[GNP]

Except for Omnisphere patches - it seems very talented folk like The Unfinished can use existing sounds in Omnisphere to create his own patches and sell them. I think the main caveat is to look up the user agreement for each VI, as I'm sure different VIs with varying degrees of encouraging to make your own patches using their samples, may vary.

If you are planning to do so, but NOT sell, then I think no VI company has to right to tell you "not allowed". Everyone has the right to butcher and mix and match any VI sounds into something cool. But if you are planning to sell your patches that has been made using other VI sounds, then that's probably a no-no.

 

[Consona]

I was reading various sites' license agreements and with sample libs, that's pretty easy; you own jack shit, can't do anything expect making music. (More or less, well, rather less than more...)

But on things like some granular synths, effects, etc., I couldn't find anything.

 

[reborn579]

i think you can create loop libraries with sample instruments, since you're basically selling a composition, not the samples themselves. i remember seeing a lot of orchestral loop libraries that sounded like they were obviously made with sampled instruments.

i'm sure you can create sampled synth instruments from vst instruments as long as you don't just record the basic presets and put them in your sample pack. if you would modify the sound or the presets and not mention any product name, i'm sure it's fine.

still, people tend to buy sampled instruments that are made with real instruments, not virtual ones. what would be the value in buying sampled samples?

 

[Geoff Moore]

i'm sure you can create sampled synth instruments from vst instruments as long as you don't just record the basic presets and put them in your sample pack. if you would modify the sound or the presets and not mention any product name, i'm sure it's fine.

You can sample a basic preset, because no recording is begin used to make the original sound. Classic synth presets are captured for Kontakt instruments all the time - but as mentioned above, they can't use the synth's name (unless it's an official licensed library).

 

[synthesizerwriter]

Look at Behringer's recent 'reimaginings' of synths to see how you can evoke the same impression without using the original name... 'Poly D' etc. But also note how they use names when there is less certainty about trademarks - original company no longer exists, for example...

 

[Mornats]

Except for Omnisphere patches - it seems very talented folk like The Unfinished can use existing sounds in Omnisphere to create his own patches and sell them.

My guess on this one is that it's allowed because the buyer has already got a licence for the sounds used in The Unfinished's patches. You couldn't sell the same patches for Kontakt as you'd have to include the sounds from Omnisphere which wouldn't be allowed.

 

[synthesizerwriter]

If I remember Kirby Ferguson's 'Everything is a Remix' correctly, there are three processes involved in creating something: copy, transform, combine. I suspect that The Unfinished's Omnisphere sounds have done all three...

 

[Daryl]

i think you can create loop libraries with sample instruments, since you're basically selling a composition, not the samples themselves.

That would entirely depend on the EULA. You are given specific permission to use the audio recordings, and the owner of those recordings is entitled to tell you what you can, and can't use them for.

 

[Scalms]

And what about using plugins(reverb, saturation, etc) to enhance a newly recorded instrument to sell?

 

[d.healey]

And what about using plugins(reverb, saturation, etc) to enhance a newly recorded instrument to sell?

You can apply effects to your own recordings and sell your own recordings, no problem. As long as you are not selling audio files that you don't own the rights to sell you're fine.

 

[José Herring]

Just wondering how does this work... using various products to make your own commercial sample library/sound pack/etc.


Sample Libs: Read some license agreements and overall, you can't use sample libraries to make your own products.

DAWs: You can use daws to make your own products.

VST Synths: I assume you can use VI synths to make your own synth patches collection and sell it. But can you sample a VI synth and make a kontakt lib out of that for example?

Hardware Synths: How does this work? Can you sample any synth and sell those samples? Or do you need some agreement from the manufacturer or something?

VST effects: Can you use vst plugins, like various Waves or Fabfilter saturators, compressors and whatnot, on your samples and then sell those?

VST synths/effects: Can you put your samples into Steinberg's Padshop or Izotope's Iris, effect them, and then sell that?

Nebulous. But, the rule of thumb is you can't use another sample library to create a sample library. For example you can't use EWQLSO string FX put them through other processing then sell that. Expressly forbidden.

On the hardware side. Even more nebulous. But, there was some noise made by Roland because people were using the original Saw wave from Famous Roland synths in sample libraries. Put the waves online and spreading them around. But, as far as I can tell if you processed that wave then there's no way that can be enforced. There then was this long discussion about forensic audio which I never was fully convinced.

As far as VSTI's you'll have to read the Eulas. A synth pure and simple, sure, a sample based synth like Omnisphere, I would imagine not.

Where it gets dicey is wavetable synths. Kind of falls in between.

But be warned. The last time I looked into this was with EW who back in the day had some of the most specific use EULA's and I got to the point were I even wondered if I could use the library in an recording at all. Seriously it was like you can use the library but you can't use any exposed single instrument unless it's accompained by another instrument either at the same time or immediately before or after......JEZZUSSS it was bad. I joked once what if I did a chromatic single note piece with rest between each note....I don't think they fully appreciated the joke.

 

[reborn579]

That would entirely depend on the EULA. You are given specific permission to use the audio recordings, and the owner of those recordings is entitled to tell you what you can, and can't use them for.

true

 

[SamC]

Was always curious about this as, although it seems you can’t resell or re-license these vsts, production music libraries do it all the time.

Does anyone know where the line is?

All the production music libraries I work for ask for stems, which on occasion, contain isolated loops or patches which can then be synced by clients.

That’s allowed but re-selling yourself is a no-no? I’ve also heard that it’s permitted, as long as the sample has at least 3 other elements alongside it.

My guess is, you can only sell or license them as songs but not explictly as “sample packs” or vsts?

It may be dependent on each developers EULA.

 

[Daryl]

All the production music libraries I work for ask for stems, which on occasion, contain isolated loops or patches which can then be synced by clients.

That’s allowed

According to some EULA, no, it's not allowed. The fact that some people do it is irrelevant. You are given a specific licence to use a copyright recording. In the case of a loop, one could argue that there is a music copyright as well. By allowing it to become isolated, you are theoretically trying to claim a Royalty on something that you didn't write.

but re-selling yourself is a no-no? I’ve also heard that it’s permitted, as long as the sample has at least 3 other elements alongside it.

My guess is, you can only sell or license them as songs but not explictly as “sample packs” or vsts?

It may be dependent on each developers EULA.

What do you mean by "re-selling"? You can use the samples in our own compositions and arrangements and "sell" those. However, you may not use them in such a way that the individual samples are exposed.

 

[SamC]

According to some EULA, no, it's not allowed. The fact that some people do it is irrelevant. You are given a specific licence to use a copyright recording. In the case of a loop, one could argue that there is a music copyright as well. By allowing it to become isolated, you are theoretically trying to claim a Royalty on something that you didn't write.

What do you mean by "re-selling"? You can use the samples in our own compositions and arrangements and "sell" those. However, you may not use them in such a way that the individual samples are exposed.

I think what muddies the water for me is that it seems all the libraries I write for are breaking the EULA. Many samples are clearly exposed in underscore versions for example. Not to mention clients now want access to all your stems. These are AAA libraries, too.

Sorry, I worded it poorly.

By “re-selling” I meant, selling your compositions as “sample packs.” Say you compose an album of ‘dramatic builds,’ can you only sell those compositions directly to clients as long as the individual samples aren’t exposed? Or is the whole idea of using them for a “sample pack” generally prohibited?

 

[Daryl]

I think what muddies the water for me is that it seems all the libraries I write for are breaking the EULA. Many samples are clearly exposed in underscore versions for example. Not to mention clients now want access to all your stems. These are AAA libraries, too.

This is usually against the EULA, and theoretically you could be forced to pull the tracks, as you have no permission to use them in that manner. However, this would only be likely to happen if one could sample the underscore and create the identical sample library that they came from. So if your track consisted of slow a scale, with a bar rest between each note, for example, this would more than raise a few eyebrows.

By “re-selling” I meant, selling your compositions as “sample packs.” Say you compose an album of ‘dramatic builds,’ can you only sell those compositions directly to clients as long as the individual samples aren’t exposed? Or is the whole idea of using them for a “sample pack” generally prohibited?

Yes, but see my above example. As long as you are creating a new composition, it's not a problem. If it was a double bass drone on different, successive notes, it would be a problem.

 

[Dark Horse]

This post does not constitute as legal advice.
This post may come off as salty. I'm a nice person. I'm just hangry right now.

Judges care about law, not overreaching EULAs that say you can't be human.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. that while it's important to secure every man in the enjoyment of his copyright, that should never limit further creativity, as always "in science and in art, there are, and can be, few, if any, things, which in an abstract sense, are strictly new and original throughout. Every book in literature, science and art, borrows, and must necessarily borrow, and use much which was well known and used before."

A violin maker would no more own a sample library created by Itzhak Perlman than a synth developer would own a sample library you took the time to design and craft techniques and performances into.

Don't reverse engineer circuitry
Don't reverse engineer source code
Don't copy their raw audio and call it your own

If the law didn't protect building on the shoulders of others, then all human creativity would be illegal. Imagine a lumberyard stamping their wood "If used to make instruments, it can't be recorded or sampled". A synth developer can no more restrict sampling your own creations, techniques, and performances. A lot of people in the music scene live in L.A. and think they are legal experts, as if L.A. was full of the most honest people on the planet. If most people had their own way, every cent on the planet would head only their direction. I could care less about that mentality. I just want to make noise and enjoy it. But whenever I see people talking about limiting creativity, I have to wonder... who do you even think you are?

Courts care that you just don't call someone else's work your own. But using the work of others to make something new... that's been ruled on enough times in history that I mean... if it hadn't been, just about everything on YouTube would be illegal these days.