Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] License for sounds
From: will_AT_malefactor.org
Date: Wed Jan 14 2004 - 11:31:12 EET
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 01:45:03PM +0100, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> Hi David!
>
> 1) Usually the demo sounds included with synthesizers are considered
> absolute freeware. Their purpose is to demonstrate that this synthesizer
> can do any sound just as well, or even better than the competition.
> Their purpose is to convince the prospective buyer that the light at the
> end of the tunnel is not (entirely) electric, and they should hand over
> their hard earned cash right away.
>
> 2) With a few tweeks, an otherwise very serious string quartet can be
> turned into something extremely silly, which you would probably not like
> to have coauthored.
>
> 3) Although commercial tunes are played 24/7 on radio stations, you will
> not be able to recognize your own sounds, except in the case when they
> are used unaltered with no postprocessing (which makes the discussion of
> "derived work" moot.) That is to say: If it is not controlable, don't
> bother making any rules.
>
4) "Derived sounds?" Holy crap, what a can of worms /that/ is.
5) Preset patches and sequences are used all the time in commercial tunes, and a lot of people will choose to use a synth just because they heard that so-and-so used this-and-that to get a certain sound (808 clap/cowbell? Motif strings?). So, if your demos are any good (they must be if you want to license them ;), it might be worthwhile to let people use them as they wish. I don't know if this even applies to free software, though, so who knows, you might actually need to clamp down on those damned preset-using IP thieves.
6) Profit?!
> cheers // Jens M Andreasen
>
>
> On ons, 2004-01-14 at 11:31, David Olofson wrote:
> > I'm trying to figure out what license to use for the demo sounds and
> > songs that come with Audiality. I don't think the songs are of much
> > interest beyond demonstrating the engine, so I'll probably just ask
> > that people don't use them in their projects without permission.
> >
> > However, the sounds (or rather, the scripts that render them) are
> > intended to be usable in about the same way as the rest of Audiality.
> > That is, as is or modified, in Free/Open Source, freeware and
> > commercial projects. No royalties, no advertising clause or anything.
> >
> > Here's the problem: I'd like derived sounds to remain open source, but
> > I'm not sure it makes sense to require it, like the LGPL does. The
> > X11 license might be more sensible. What do you think?
> >
> >
> > //David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
> >
> > .- Audiality -----------------------------------------------.
> > | Free/Open Source audio engine for games and multimedia. |
> > | MIDI, modular synthesis, real time effects, scripting,... |
> > `-----------------------------------> http://audiality.org -'
> > --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 14 2004 - 15:29:29 EET