Non-free No Budget instruments

Link to good samples/soundfonts at http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/free_audio_data

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

Post Reply
Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

So I've looked at the licenses for NBO and NBB samples and quite a few are NC which means they are not free. I suggest getting rid of such samples are looking for a free replacement. I plan to explicitly mark non-free ones on the site.
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Non-commercial doesn't mean you can't freely use, modify, and redistribute the samples. It just means you can't explictly sell them, or deriviatives, as part or whole of a commercial product.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

If you can't sell them, that means you can't freely redistribute. More info: http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

FaTony wrote:If you can't sell them, that means you can't freely redistribute.
Not sure where you read that, but it's definitely not correct. The article you cited (which is an opinion piece far too lacking in legal case study to dare make such a conclusion), never makes that conclusion. The closest it gets... and this is an entirely different point... is to make the recommendation (paraphrased):

"Don't create something from NC content because then you maybe won't be able to distribute your stuff under more permissive terms".

Well yeah that's like a bsd author warning "Don't use that gpl stuff because then you can't redistribute as bsd. You have to use gpl".

You can't redistribute nc material... for profit. You and I aren't doing that with nbo. Furthermore, the license texts provide attribution, and retain original terms. There's no need to add any "warnings" to the web site. We're fine.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

Let me quote:
The “non-commercial use only” variants of the Creative Commons licenses are non-free
It's simple as that. For example I really want NBO to be in Debian Main so I can just

Code: Select all

apt-get install nbo
. But Debian CDs and DVDs are sold and NC means they can't sell it with NBO. This means they will never accept NC. Or if they change DFSG, I will migrate to another distribution that is committed to freedom.
Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

Also, some instruments don't have licensing information at all. This means "all rights reserved". "All rights reserved" means "as proprietary as it gets".

Samples from freesound have this:
These are vastly different licenses. Sampling+ and BY-NC are non-free. I have no idea what listing all those licenses actually means.

I've looked at freesound.org and here's what I've found in the help section:
"Noncommercial" works like attribution, but you can't earn any money with the piece of work you create!
.
This is actually very right. If you use NC samples, your work is also NC. Here's a funny excerpt from one of NBO licenses:
MUSIC SAMPLE LIBRARY PROJECT SAMPLES (OR: MSLP) WHERE CREATED BY ERICK KVIST WITH HELP FROM THE PERFORMING MUSICIANS
AND IT'S AN ONGOING PROJECT. IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE
OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT: INFO@MUSICSAMPLELIBRARY.COM

IMPORTANT!!!
I CHOSE THE 'CC BY-NC' LICENSE TO STOP ANYONE FROM SELLING THE SAMPLES.
BUT THE SAMPLES ARE FREE TO USE FOR ANY CREATIVE MUSICAL PURPOSES. YOU CAN SELL YOUR MUSIC MADE FROM THE SAMPLES.
BEING A NO:1 HIT SONG, MUSIC FOR TV/RADIO COMMERCIALS OR A BLOCKBUSTER MOVIE SOUNDTRACK, IT DOES NOT MATTER!
.
Here the author of this text shows his total lack of understanding how things actually work.

And for the last thing: http://blog.wolftune.com/2011/07/brain- ... video.html
Here the author makes an interesting observation that you can't use CC-BY-NC and CC-BY-SA samples in the same work..
Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

Yeah, most people have no idea how copyright really works. After looking through all this info I realized I need to change licenses of my music to make it actually legal.

EDIT: Uh oh, FlameStudios samples are GPL which means they are incompatible with CC-BY-SA... Until near past: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/cre ... -version-3
rghvdberg
Established Member
Posts: 1067
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 7:11 am
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by rghvdberg »

falkTX wrote:you're assuming that people that make music actually care about licenses.
even famous EDM producers use cracked plugins...

fyi I do care myself about this myself, I just wanted to note that most people sadly don't.
oh my ...
proves that all Dutchies are cheapskates
Lyberta
Established Member
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:15 pm
Location: The Internet
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Non-free No Budget instruments

Post by Lyberta »

Alright, I have gone through all samples, checked the license of all of them and added that information to the site. As you can see, only 9 out of 54 instruments (17%) are free cultural works.
Post Reply