On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 07:21:48AM +0000, Chris Cannam wrote: > The whole purpose of these instruments is to be performed, recorded, > and otherwise redistributed. That's what they sell them for. > Imagine you put out a minimal electro track recorded with a Roland > instrument (as many have done) and described it on the back as a > recording of a Roland instrument. Could they sue you for that? I know that laws requiring some sort of artistic/aesthetic judgement for their enforcement are on thin ice, but surely it's easy to determine the intention here. Either you are a recording a piece of music (legitimate use) or you are making a carefully graded set of copies of the sample data for use by anyone who wants to clone the instrument (arguably not legitimate). I can't believe that it would require much of an expert witness to decide which was the intention in any specific case. Before someone starts on sampling, my point is that nobody produces a recording of music with the *intention* that it should be sampled and used in something else, unless it's something like a sound effects cellection in which case that intention is quite clear and the copyright statement would be worded accordingly. -- Anahata anahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: 01638 720444 http://www.treewind.co.uk Mob: 07976 263827
