[fluid-dev] Re: [Swami-devel] Re: [Linuxsampler-devel] Re: [ANN] Beta test of the Resonance Instrument Database

[Josh Green]

On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 19:08 +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> Josh Green schrieb:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 07:48 +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> > 
> >>Josh Green schrieb:
> >>
> >>>I'm happy to announce the initial beta testing of the Resonance
> >>>Instrument Database: http://sounds.resonance.org.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I'm really looking forward to contribute some hardware-synth samples 
> >>(Novation A Station, Waldorf Rack Attack, Vermona DRM MK II...).
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > I think its probably generally breaking copyright laws to distribute
> > hardware synth samples.
> I'd create them myself, trigger the synth, record with audacity, do some 
> editing, pack it as gig and write the DLS-1 INFO-block "ICOP" as well as 
> the "ICMT" block (comment). Any questions? I even wouldn't offer preset 
> samples, I'd enhance them *g*
> 
> And "to think it's probably" a break of law is not "to know" that it is 
> breaking any law *g*
> 

No suggestions from me, really.  I was just mining the Internet for free
gig and SoundFont files and found quite a lot of samples of other
hardware synths.  A lot of them are likely older synths though that the
company no longer cares about.  Most of them are single instruments too,
its not as if its a rip of an entire patch set of a sample based synth.
I think the question really becomes:
Will the manufacturer of your synth get pissed off enough concerning
your sampled instruments to actually start trying to have the content
removed.

This question is probably valid regardless of whether you are actually
directly breaking copyright or not.  Of course if that time comes, it
might be fairly simple to resolve.  Just remove the content.  I'm not
real familiar with hardware synths, so I'm curious.  Are those synths
you mentioned sample based, or analog?

It would be nice to see author's creating original works, that aren't
necessarily rips of other synths.  Then you completely avoid the whole
issue in the first place.  I'm not quite sure what the policy should be
though for the instrument database.  I think some caution is wise.  Best
regards,
        Josh Green

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part