What's new

Would you pay for software you can legally get for free?

gregh

Senior Member
I

Recently, I saw an orchestra on Youtube and turned on the sound. I recognized the chart instantly- I wrote it. :( Didn't know a damn thing about them playing it or how they got it. Obviously I wasn't paid for them ripping off my chart.
the strangest one I had was back in the early 80s when I did the soundtrack / design for a play. A few weeks later I (and my mum at her place) heard the music on half time during the broadcast of the (Australian) football ! What was really weird is the sound included things like whale song so it was quite abstract to hear in that context.
 

Inductance

Active Member
So why do you pay for libraries?
The bottom line is that I understand that it takes a lot of time, money, and effort to craft these libraries. If I find them valuable, if I believe they give me what I need to create the music I want to create, then I have no problem paying the amount the developer is asking for. It's the moral thing to do, imo. Plus, we see a lot of these developers hanging around here, and a lot of us interact with them. It would make me feel even more guilty about taking their stuff for free.

Btw, there are also a lot of people out there that feel there's nothing wrong with taking MUSIC for free.
 

douggibson

Active Member
the strangest one I had was back in the early 80s when I did the soundtrack / design for a play. A few weeks later I (and my mum at her place) heard the music on half time during the broadcast of the (Australian) football ! What was really weird is the sound included things like whale song so it was quite abstract to hear in that context.
Well....this is very good news for you ! You would have been paid for this. Particularly in Australia. APRA is on top of this stuff. It's pretty night and day with AUS vs US regulation of this stuff. In Australia, I believe, there are even what is called "Moral Rights" to copyright which the US does not have as part of copyright law (fill in your own assumptions)

Basically, as long as you picked up the phone and called APRA you would have been paid. That's not the case for VST.

It would be interesting to ponder a VST performing rights Society for developers. Nah....sounds awful.

I remember I moderated a panel on music TV clearances/placements and, I can't remember the name of the company now, but hey were the biggest in Australia at the time. They shared a story of (this was in 04) the new "reality TV" trend and the problems it was causing them. I don't recall if it was Big Brother, but something like that. Anyhow, one of the people on there got in the shower and began singing some hip-hop pop tune. Basically about 5-8 seconds
of just this person singing alone the song chorus. Not the actual recording.

Boom.....next morning.....AR guy. That counted as a song use without clearance. $50,000 bill to clear it all up.

Basically the last 25 + years has just been a massive cluster fuck to all previous copyrights laws.
 

Straight2Vinyl

New Member
I buy because for the most part it's less hastle than searching for free copies. They always caused problems for my PC and often were just a bitch to install. Of course, I just purchased the Virharmonic Cello and it's been a nightmare to install as every file turns up corrupted, which has never been a problem with any other paid for library EVER.
Otherwise, it tends to be easier.
 

Fleer

Feeding the Trolls
I would not mind people using my so-called “intellectual property” or the fruit of my artistic endeavors for their own pleasure or broader human flourishing. Heck, even I know that anything originating from myself or any other person will never be entirely or even genuinely original.
So, only when people use my musings for financial gain would I intervene and ask them to share their derived wealth with any identifiable source.
Hence, except for them, would I allow my creative produce to be enjoyed freely. Unless we do so, intellectual property unjustly freezes human and societal development.
Your song is never entirely yours, only partly so, dear Elton.
 

JonSolo

Not Han's Brother
I would not mind people using my so-called “intellectual property” or the fruit of my artistic endeavors for their own pleasure or broader human flourishing. Heck, even I know that anything originating from myself or any other person will never be entirely or even genuinely original.
So, only when people use my musings for financial gain would I intervene and ask them to share their derived wealth with any identifiable source.
Hence, except for them, would I allow my creative produce to be enjoyed freely. Unless we do so, intellectual property unjustly freezes human and societal development.
Your song is never entirely yours, only partly so, dear Elton.
This is a great point of view. To a large extent I agree, especially because I have made a lot of music with NO intention of selling it or using it as a part of anything. If someone wants to enjoy it, awesome. I also feel this way about music I did a long time ago, no matter why I created it.

On a similar vein, years ago I read an article where someone suggested the legal free distribution of outdated software. I don't remember much of the details as to HOW it would work other than three years after software is updated or discontinued it should be considered as "freeware" or "abandon-ware" that would not carry the same ramifications as distributing current software. There was some detail about making money with it etc.

Even though I do not use Reaper, I understand that it has a tiered license system that enables users not making money from it to use it for less money. That would be outstanding, but also hard to keep up with because of trust issues.
 

gregh

Senior Member
Even though I do not use Reaper, I understand that it has a tiered license system that enables users not making money from it to use it for less money. That would be outstanding, but also hard to keep up with because of trust issues.
the Reaper response is very sensible I think - they basically run a trust system as an open response to piracy. My main concern now is with software hiding behind the leasing model so that you can't on-sell it. I have some good libraries that I never use that I can't sell to someone else - harming both me and someone who would actually use them but can't afford them.
 

lpuser

Active Member
If you say (a) what is your reason for purchasing something you can get for free, legally?
I often pay for something which I could get for free, because being an artist myself, I appreciate the time and efforts others put into products, music etc. I love and use. Maybe I do not always pay as much as it would cost through a regular distribution (e.g. when an album is usually distributed for 10$, sometimes I pay 9$ or 8$ depending on the value, sometimes I pay full).
 

Desire Inspires

To the stars through desire....
I would not mind people using my so-called “intellectual property” or the fruit of my artistic endeavors for their own pleasure or broader human flourishing. Heck, even I know that anything originating from myself or any other person will never be entirely or even genuinely original.
So, only when people use my musings for financial gain would I intervene and ask them to share their derived wealth with any identifiable source.
Hence, except for them, would I allow my creative produce to be enjoyed freely. Unless we do so, intellectual property unjustly freezes human and societal development.
Your song is never entirely yours, only partly so, dear Elton.
Remember....

 

givemenoughrope

Senior Member
What about a library that everyone contributes to? Plenty of instrumentalists and noise makers here. Why not sample yourself, another person contributes by editing, another by scripting and another by making either midi tracks or rex files...? You have to contribute in order to use it. Or you pay for it. We can decide by consensus what to sample, how to sample it...you know, stuff to fill in the gaps of what already exists. I sample library co-op in a way. I'd be into it.
 

zeng

composer
What about this approach;

You got some VSTs in some way (from a friend or etc.) without paying for just playing with them, in demo mode for ex (you didn't buy because they are not suitable for you or for your paid music style). And some day you used one of them in your commercial work, and you just purchased it?
 

Saxer

Senior Member
I think it's a fragile business model if you want to sell something that you can get for free elsewhere (without legal/moral/handling hassle). You probably can get some willing people to buy your stuff but they at least need background information to get the reasons why they should pay. A lot of people (including me) pay more for the same thing if they know why (like renewable energy, fair trade products, local area products etc). But you have to have the clients interested in those reasons and have to let them know before they get your stuff for free elsewhere.
 

DarkestShadow

Senior Member
What's the point of this question? o_O
It just sounds like donation ware - see Ivy Audio. You can can get it for free or pay (what ever you want) aka donate.
 

cucio

New Member
It just sounds like donation ware - see Ivy Audio.
It is the same if you only care about how much it will set you back. As @d.healey has mentioned elsewhere in the thread, open source / free (as in speech) software has further reaching implications, other than how much it costs.

Private open source projects (i.e., those that don't manage to get the support of a consortium funded by companies or public institutions) don't usually do well finantially. Unless their product is business-oriented (content management, CM templates, software engineering, productivity software, etc.), where customer support is the actual product they sell.

But if your product is not overly complex and most of your potential customers are hobbyists, then it is probably going to be tough to make ends meet with an open source model that anyone can copy and build on. You can maybe gain some insight on the subject of open source audio software from Paul Davis' Ardour blog: https://community.ardour.org/node

It is crazy if you think about it, but something being free diminishes its value to some customers: "I don't have to pay for it? This must be crap, why donate, then?"

Regarding licensing, sample-based virtual instruments fall in a gray area between being software and content. Sound libraries sold separately from the playing engine can maybe be considered something like clipart. Perhaps you could use different licenses for each part of your product.

I recall CC launched a license specific for samples some years ago, but it never gained much traction. I think it had some legal problems or didn't cover well some cases. Sampling is a legal and philosophical minefield, as many discussions in this site or others like it can attest to.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom