Xuriik
Offline
Puerto Rico

I considered that if I'd ever release commercially, I'd need to consider the tools I'm using in the release. Then I thought it would be a hassle to go to all those pages and check the rights.

Then I thought about all the other beginners in my situation. I thought maybe we could put together a single thread with a list of most of the popular tools used for chipmusic, and put what you are and are not allowed to do next to them, in simple terms. Something like: "LSDJ: commercial software, attribution is not necessary but appreciated." Not just software, but samples and things of the sort. I think it could help a lot of people.

I'm busy right now as I make this thread, but I'll come around later and edit the first post to add some of the ones I use. If you guys wanna help out, you could post the tools you use, and what you are and are not allowed to do with them here. I mean, is this even a good idea or...?

HolyNegative0
Offline
Texas

I think it's a great idea. I don't have anything to contribute yet, but I'll be posting things as soon as I start actually making this stuff. 8D

godinpants
Offline
hardcore, Australia

Why would you need to credit software on a release?
It's not like fender demands royalties from every recording of one of their guitars.

Xuriik
Offline
Puerto Rico

No, but that's because they already made money off the sale. Free software is different in some cases. I think. I'm not even sure, bro, I'm new to worrying about all this legal musical topic and I want to cover all my bases because either the lawyers will come and eat me, or I'll piss off the maker of my favorite program. I want to avoid both.

And you DO need to credit samples, In most cases. Its a gray area. Bluh. Let's say I sample sounds from an indie game. Or a commercial game I never bought. Details, details.

godinpants
Offline
hardcore, Australia

I'm not talking about sampling.

When someone gives away content producing software the idea of them then controlling the content is ridiculous. Any copyrights they choose to hold over the product are over the product itself rather than te content.
You can distribute the product of the software anywhere you want. That is your intellectual property regardless. But you couldn't then distribute the software itself without permission.

VCMG
Offline
California
godinpants wrote:

When someone gives away content producing software the idea of them then controlling the content is ridiculous..

That's funny, Apple's doing exactly that with their new eBook publishing thing.

Last edited by VCMG (Feb 10, 2012 5:13 am)

nitro2k01
Offline
Sweeeeeeden
VCMG wrote:
godinpants wrote:

When someone gives away content producing software the idea of them then controlling the content is ridiculous..

That's funny, Apple's doing exactly that with their new eBook publishing thing.

You're talking about something completely different. From the consumer's perspective it's a way of restricting your access to what you have paid for. From the content producer's perspective, they're not selling software to write books, as much as a full service book publishing platform and service. What you're suggesting would be equivalent to LSDj offering an online store for music created with the program.

Xuriik
Offline
Puerto Rico

In that case, I guess this thread is useless, since everybody's sample library is different. Unless I accept the daunting task of researching popularly used samples in chipmusic and their terms of use.

So a good rule of thumb is: credit any software you didn't pay for?
No, because if a plugin or homebrew program is released under CC-BY-NC-SA; I have to release under that same license, don't I?

Thread might be salvaged.

nitro2k01
Offline
Sweeeeeeden

Generally with software under a free license, you need to license derivative works under the same license. It's doubtful whether sounds created with a piece of software qualifies as a derivative work. Watch out with samples on the other hand. As a rule of thumb, ask the creator of the sample if it's unclear whether it was meant to be freely usable in music production, or at the very least give attribution.

squidula
Offline
Chicago, IL

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1439153019/ref … 1439153019

everything you are asking is in this book.
its not only informative, but actually a pretty entertaining read smile

Xuriik
Offline
Puerto Rico
nitro2k01 wrote:

...ask the creator of the sample if it's unclear whether it was meant to be freely usable in music production...

Yeah, I figured that's what I'd do, it's where the idea for this thread came from.
"I need to make a list of all the things I use for music, so I know if attribution is important. Ugh, that's gonna be so much work. Maybe someone could let me see theirs? There should be a thread..."

Subconscious laziness.

squidula wrote:

everything you are asking is in this book.

Thank you so much! smile

Xuriik
Offline
Puerto Rico

Yeah, attribution is a chore, I'd rather get better at sound synthesis and be 100% original whenever I release commercially. Problem solved. I'm going back to worrying about finishing my RPM album.

EDIT: Sorry for double posting I forgot I should edit the previous one.

Last edited by Xuriik (Feb 10, 2012 10:48 am)