TAXI.com

Hey friends,
I stumbled across this VERY interesting article in the Sound on Sound magazine:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr10/a ... s_0410.htm

It deals with the use of sound libraries in various projects without getting into legal issues
with the manufacturers of the libraries. It made me think twice about reading the fine print on the
boxes of all the libraries I own.
Check it out and share your thoughts.
regards
Adonis

We all need to be cognizant of this, it could be a real issue. Many libraries don't want their loops exposed by themselves for any length of time. This can become an issue if you submit stems or submixes of your music to libraries. Some libraries want this and it is a good thing because it raises the potential for usage of your music. But when you do stems, you're often taking out certain tracks to make a different mix so you have to be careful not to violate the terms of your license with some sample libraries by doing this. Often you'll break a piece down to drums only or bass and drums, etc. Some libraries want two or more elements mixed with their loops.

This goes double for games because it's all about stems with that type of composing.

Make sure you read the fine print.

Also I avoid using "construction kits", particularly from certain publishers because they don't allow their use in music libraries period.

Make sure you read the fine print. (did I say that already?)

Mazz

This is why I prefer to use only MIDI loops, unless I'm rolling my own.

Audio loops are a necessity when working under deadlines and have been very useful for me, but I tend to tweak them somewhat, even if only with filtering or effects. But it's important to use loops that are "clean" when it comes to licensing and to know the limitations the publisher has placed on them. If time is of the essence, then using loops is pretty much the only way to help get stuff knocked out.

Here's a direct quote from the license for Heavocity Evolve, a library I use quite extensively on my music:

"Use of unmodified Samples appearing in isolation such as, but not limited to, in video game
soundtracks, gaming machines, and/or toys (where they may appear in isolation or as sound
effects) is not permitted without first obtaining a separate written license (which may be issued
at the sole discretion of Owner).

Loops (continuous repeating compositions that contain only a combination of modified Samples)
must be used in a musical context with at least two other instruments or loops that contribute
significantly to the composition. The Loop may be an element, but not the entire composition."

Make sure you follow these licenses for all the loops you use. If you don't have any placements yet, but you're a serious composer with some forwards or are already in libraries, then the chances are good you'll get placements. Behave as if this will happen and act accordingly in all of your dealings.

Cheers!!

Mazz

hey..?.. if we all put an example or two up this might be a handy resource for quickly checking T&Cs before buying.

Heres ueberschall

Can I use your samples in my production?
Solution:

We wrote the following text to make licensing a little bit clearer. If it doesn't answer your questions, do not hesitate to contact us.


"You have purchased the right to use its samples, loops and mixes for your productions. But it is of prime importance that you DON'T use material from our libraries in isolation. That means, you CAN use e.g. a lick or a loop but you MUST add/layer another musical instrument/sound. You CANNOT take e.g. a "construction-kit-mix" or a demo track without any musical modification/addition. You MUST add one or more instrumental phrases or licks if you want to use this production for commercial purposes. Taking the mixes from a library and to just overdub some lyrics wouldn't really be a process of composing music (rather we would say: ueberschall composed the music, you did the lyrics)."

What you CAN and CANNOT do with the contents of this product:

YOU CAN:

a) Use them in any type of music production, for example: making records, remixes, commercials, jingles, commissioned pieces, soundtracks for film, theatre, library music, musicals, computer games and multimedia.

b) You may modify the sounds.


YOU CANNOT:

c) lend, rent, copy, duplicate, trade or resell this product or its contents (also modified contents). This is strictly prohibited.

d) upload or download this product, or any of the sounds on it, to any database, BBS or server. In effect, any such action is piracy, is therefore illegal, and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. We will show no mercy with pirates when caught.

e) sell the product second hand or use any sample, loop, or sound from second hand products legally in your musical production.

f) offer samples, loops, or sounds from the content to a number of clients in a commercial studio unless you have a Multi User Licence. Contact us at http://www.ueberschall.com for more information on this.

g) making music or sounds that will be licensed or sold as Sound Clips, or other Sampling products.

h) the individual sounds cannot be used on their own as music, background noises or Sound FXs in computer games, multimedia productions, music releases or commercial jingles (whereby these examples listed comprise a representative but not exhaustive list).

This seems fair (library use ok)....heavocity insisting on 2 other instruments is a joke.....what hapens when someone wants a drums with bass track?

I also dont like the "must credit the company if you use a loop" that is included by certain manufacturers. Do they deserve any credit? Maybe thats another thread! Seems to me that the brush manufacturer wants credit for the paintings.
I dont like the fact that I have to keep notes on this and if anyone slips up down the line so the credit does not appear then they can take me to court.

Consider whether it's practical and profitable for them to do so. Use common sense and don't use naked store-bought loops, you should be fine, for most intents and purposes.

I make a point of avoiding manufacturers with onerous conditions.
Luckily there are options.

Most of these conditions make sense if you think about them. If you create a sample library that is a "construction kit", which is basically a full mix groove of some length that is broken out into "stems". It's basically easy to take that and loop it and call it a "song" or a "composition". If you're a lazy composer, you might actually do that, and if your integrity is less than professional, you might even submit it and call it your own piece. The creator of the loop didn't intend it to be used like that and they are relying on the honor system that composers who buy their loops will use them creatively as a palette of sounds and not as the whole composition.

If these libraries jump on the bandwagon of whatever watermarking or fingerprinting technology eventually gets used universally, if someone uses their unadorned loops, it will get picked up and reported and they can follow up with the production company, who will most likely go after the library and eventually the composer, if the producer of the loops wants to pursue the unlicensed usage. If the production has already gone to TV, DVD, etc., it's going to be extremely difficult to remove the piece and potentially expensive legally. Do you want your name associated with that kind of stuff? I didn't think so!

I wouldn't be paranoid about using loops, just careful. C'mon, you hear stuff from Stylus all the time on TV, it's got a distinctive sound, but the best composers use it in a way that is creative and doesn't violate the license.

Caveat emptor!!!

Mazz

I think some of these licenses are very problematic from a legal point of view.

Copyright law only let's you copyright melodies and lyrics, ONLY! You can even rip off the exact chord sequence WITH groove from the current no-1 hit, without loosing in court, as long as you don't rip off trademark stuff from the song. That's the law.

Then comes a random sample library on the street and want's to prevent you from using their loops. Well, first off what if their 'loop' is just a 4 to the floor beat with some 8ths in the hihat. This is used in millions of pieces, everyone knows how to play or program it, but now a sample library can claim it's THEIR 'loop'?? Yet, you can't copyright a 'loop', so what's the legal claim - you can't use their sample, even if you've purchased a license to use it?? So is this then a workaround the copyright law, as we know it?

It looks like a very grey zone to me, and if the companies start to sue musicians, I'd bet they'll ruin their own business as noone will ever touch their libraries again. To me it seems like there also is very large ego's in these licences - they need to understand and accept the concept 'work for hire' IMO

I recently got a sample library, that turned out to be more of a construction kit. But even if I can trigger the samples one by one and make my own tracks, I'm not allowed to use it for production music to music libraries. I recently wasted 100$ on a library I don't dare to use for other than personal 'fun', because the licence agreement is so restrictive. I could not review the licence before the purchase, and when I got the software, the license agreement looked like this:

The samples contained herein are licensed, not sold to you, the individual end user,
by XXXXXXXXX. This non-exclusive, non-transferable license is granted only to the
individual end user who has purchased an unopened, new and lawfully made copy
of this product from a dealer or distributor authorized by XXXXXXX. All samples
remain the property of XXXXXXXXX and are licensed only for use in the creation
of a live or recorded performance that includes the licensed samples as part of a
derivative musical work created by the licensed end user. This license expressly
forbids resale, rental, loan, gift or transfer of these samples in any format or via any
medium, except as part of a derivative musical work. The samples may not be
included, whether unmodified or as part of a derivative work, in any music library or
sample library product. Any unlicensed usage will be prosecuted to the maximum
extent possible under the law.

Let's read closer - how do you interpret this particular phrase:
"The samples may not be included, whether unmodified or as part of a derivative work, in any music library or sample library product."?

As far as I can read this means that, even if I make my own unique loops from these sampled DRUMS!!! I can't license those tracks (even in context of my own composition!) to music libraries!! That's not only restrictive, that's INSANE! If they wrote that I can't use the samples for a stem, that would be different, and more legit.

But I got that library, because I needed a particular type of samples for doing production music. They are not even unique, as there's a ton of these on the market! Now because this was a download purchase, it's not returnable! How's that for business practice? It's not even legal in scandinavian countries to sell unreturnable products, but on the Internet you can do anything (this is actually from a VERY reputable company!). I think licence agreements like this is highly unprofessional, and does not concur with how music business works - and it makes me plain MAD

I get the one finger 'musician' problem (a synth like Onmisphere also has a restrictive licence agreement with use in context of two other instruments), and the current practice of providing 'multis' - but I don't think corroding copyright law is the answer to deal with this, as that will result in other way more serious problems.

Sorry to rant like this, but in this case I actually think it's valid. I think it's great that SOS put's focus on this subject, as I think it can easily get out of hand. You REALLY have to read these licence agreements before you buy, and if you can't, don't do it.

I have been considering getting into using loops etc.

Are there any stories of people getting into 'hot water' with this?

Stuart