Login

Pirates !

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs

Re: Pirates !

Postby david1103 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:50 pm

MegaDude wrote:ah ok, thanks. makes sense. I'm in favor of uploading evil versions of nebula on cracked websites.
:D


:evil: Ha Ha Ha, You dare to pirate our precious??!! Feel our wrath!!!! :evil:
User avatar
david1103
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:26 am

Re: Pirates !

Postby sfunk » Fri Feb 08, 2013 8:57 pm

I think most of you might have overlooked my post so i'll say it again.

The developers should contact the site (the one that has News in its name) and tell then you want their products taken off the torrent list. Slate and co did this with their stuff and the guys at that site took it all down and they have a policy the prevents Slate products from being posted there.
sfunk
Member
Member
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby Ericcc » Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:12 pm

I think it is funny that people that are on pirate sites, like the thread starter, bark here that software is pirated...WHAT are you doing on those sites anyway? Being hypocrite? :roll:

for discussion purpuses only:

I think we need to be very careful who we are calling pirates. Is it not so that hardware is pirated as well by the developers? All they do is send signals thru a device they don't have the intellectual property for and record and process that and SELL it.. A lot of others think that way (not at least the hardware manufacturers). To be honest, this bugs me a little. I therefore have much respect for Bricasti that allows for the making of M7 with Nebula but for FREE...

Pirates should not condemn other pirates, and this is the statement of the day ;P
I will get popcorn now... and hide :mrgreen:
Ericcc
User Level 0
User Level 0
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:11 am

Re: Pirates !

Postby Jacquard » Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:59 pm

Ericcc wrote:I think it is funny that people that are on pirate sites, like the thread starter, bark here that software is pirated...WHAT are you doing on those sites anyway? Being hypocrite? :roll:


FYI I only started the thread to inform the developers that some libraries were being cracked. And while some good points were made on the topic of piracy, I think this thread should now be closed.

As for calling me a "barking hypocrite", I will simply remind you that you don't know what's on my hard-drive. I also don't know what's on yours, let's keep it that way. I know it's tempting to point your finger at people and call them "pirates" when they simply use the word "cracked" in a sentence, but be a good sport and do like everybody else on this forum : show a minimum of respect.

Cheers,
J.
Jacquard
User Level 0
User Level 0
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:06 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby Ericcc » Sat Feb 09, 2013 5:29 pm

but be a good sport and do like everybody else on this forum : show a minimum of respect.


That is my point.. I can NOT have respect for people that grab all kinds of software from pirate sites and once they find something that they paid for start crying foul play... But I digress... Everything is fine and no one here is pirating.. hope that is comforting 8-)
Ericcc
User Level 0
User Level 0
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:11 am

Re: Pirates !

Postby Jacquard » Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:38 pm

Ericcc wrote:
but be a good sport and do like everybody else on this forum : show a minimum of respect.


That is my point.. I can NOT have respect for people that grab all kinds of software from pirate sites and once they find something that they paid for start crying foul play... But I digress... Everything is fine and no one here is pirating.. hope that is comforting 8-)


Again, I didn't start this thread to bark nor cry, but simply to give a heads-up to the Nebula community. And while I completely share you view on people compulsively grabbing every new piece of cracked software that comes out, I still think you haven't quite understood the purpose of the thread and my position on the subject.

Anyway, long story short, we are on the same team. So let's shake hands and go back to making good music ;)
Jacquard
User Level 0
User Level 0
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:06 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby cps418 » Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:09 pm

Ericcc wrote:I think it is funny that people that are on pirate sites, like the thread starter, bark here that software is pirated...WHAT are you doing on those sites anyway? Being hypocrite? :roll:

for discussion purpuses only:

I think we need to be very careful who we are calling pirates. Is it not so that hardware is pirated as well by the developers? All they do is send signals thru a device they don't have the intellectual property for and record and process that and SELL it.. A lot of others think that way (not at least the hardware manufacturers). To be honest, this bugs me a little. I therefore have much respect for Bricasti that allows for the making of M7 with Nebula but for FREE...

Pirates should not condemn other pirates, and this is the statement of the day ;P
I will get popcorn now... and hide :mrgreen:


You do not have to be a participant of the sites to know it's there. just the other day I had to format my sons hardrive and reinstall windows (since his computer is the internet computer in my house, and gets viruses.) So after reinstalling I always lose my internet bookmarks. So I google type "alexb nebula", which of course brings up his site (for me to rebookmark), as well as it brings up everything else related to nebula and alexb, including "PIRATED" sites and so on. Now as for as the dev. being pirates, thats kind of iffy, N**e, S*L, A*I, have hardware copyrights, not sound copyrights, and nebula only claims to emulate a sound, and ,or software that may function as the copyrighted hardware, like waves, tracks, native instruments and so on.
cps418
User Level XI
User Level XI
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby SWAN » Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:27 am

sfunk wrote:I think most of you might have overlooked my post so i'll say it again.

The developers should contact the site (the one that has News in its name) and tell then you want their products taken off the torrent list. Slate and co did this with their stuff and the guys at that site took it all down and they have a policy the prevents Slate products from being posted there.


thats interesting - that you can work with these sites and have a policy. I never thought that would be possible. I wonder if there was threats or the pirate site just listened and did as requested...

Thats good news as a developer.
Mac Mini i7 quad 2.6

Logic X
Live 9
Reaper
SWAN
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby SWAN » Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:34 am

by the way - I dont think being informed of what goes on in the piracy world means you are using pirate software. Any savvy developer for example should know what goes on there-and what they are working against. If you can work with these areas - that is something. Better than burying your head in the sand.
Mac Mini i7 quad 2.6

Logic X
Live 9
Reaper
SWAN
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: Pirates !

Postby Henry Olonga » Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:13 am

Ericcc wrote:
for discussion purpuses only:

I think we need to be very careful who we are calling pirates. Is it not so that hardware is pirated as well by the developers? All they do is send signals thru a device they don't have the intelle ;) :D ctual property for and record and process that and SELL it.. A lot of others think that way (not at least the hardware manufacturers). To be honest, this bugs me a little. I therefore have much respect for Bricasti that allows for the making of M7 with Nebula but for FREE...

Pirates should not condemn other pirates, and this is the statement of the day ;P
I will get popcorn now... and hide :mrgreen:


For discussion as you say. . . .

Couple of thoughts from me as this is a grey area and unchartered territory but developers should not be viewed pirates IMHO as your nuance portrays. It is too simplistic a view I am no lawyer but here is a soft rebuttal.

First of all bigger companies have done this convolution thing and even received Industry awards and incredible reviews for this and none of them were called pirates so slow down in your conclusions. Think liquid channel, liquidmix, Sinetifex, Audioease, Waves Q - clone etc. Nebula just does it better.

My hardware does not produce a sound - for example my A*I channel strip - paid £ 2 400 for it. Lets not confuse an instrument with an fx unit. Many people even sample instruments which I am sure you no doubt may use and do you call them pirates? I mean it's 'worse' with them because they can define the exact sound they are 'pirating' right. It has a pitch, a length and a timbre. But what about an EQ? it goes from 20 hz to perhaps 100 khz and can manipulate an almost infinite number of points on the spectrum between its extremes. It can process a sound that I first have to create and that I own the copyright to first and foremost. Different instruments sound different with the same settings on a piece. The timbre of the instrument determines what is accentuated or diminished. This is why some hardware pieces don' t work too well on some instruments. A*I do not license the hardware to me like software. They sell it to me. They do not limit me with an end user license agreement on what I can do with my piece. They don't say please don't record bass through it, or piano or sweep tones. They do not tell me what to mix and what I can do with my mix. Software samples is different and the the makers even charge more for TV or film use and have different policies to cover this. Think Spectrasonics.

But what intelectual property can you say a developer is pirating by creating mix tools using hardware - except pre packaged for an end user to use in a DAW instead of post packaged in my facility on my time? The sound? Well it's silent until I pass something I created through it right? What can A*I say they own? The punchiness, the slickness, the resolution? Wait a minute the sound even changes if I use a different sample rate or bit depth or different convertors, or clocking, or different cables so what exactly is their sound anyway?I am familiar with it so it is a rhetorical question but it is harder to define. We can describe it with adjectives familiar to us in abstract terms. One artist may well use different language to describe the same piece another artist describes in an opposing manner. So we may say N**e is larger than life, tubes are fatter, solid state is cleaner etc but can you really call that IP? If I record a low signal, it is different to distorting the input. If I daisy chain the signal from one piece into another the tone changes. If I use a power regulator I can get a cleaner signal. If Michael does a library it's bound to be different in sound to mine even if its the exact same piece. If I plug a different mic into it and move it around and change the mic again the sound changes. If I bypass the eq, again the sound changes. Do they license or describe the Fireface sound, the Orpheus sound, the Lynx sound. No. So these are tools. Like hammers or screw drivers, soldering irons - merely a small part of the chain that leads to a final product that is a complete whole and that is more complex than the parts themselves. Totally dependent on who is using them, how they use them and for what purpose.

Scenario one - you own a piece of hardware, pass your files through it to get the sound on your album which becomes a hit. Do you pay some royalty to the hardware maker if your song hits the radio or TV? Do you violate some intelectual property rights? Of course not. You are using the hardware creatively to shape a product. I paint a bit. Oil painting. The oil colour maker or brush maker has no IP in my final product. He sells me a medium, a way to get there - a tool. His reward is the money I pay up front. If he can sell enough of them at a reasonable price he can earn a living. But no paint brush maker would dare tell an end user what to paint and what not to paint or limit the creative use of a brush. ' you violated my IP because you painted a horse. My brushes should only be used to paint landscapes.' Sounds silly right. If I took my A*I and hammered nails with it and abused it , A*I would be sad because I am misappropriating a high value product but they cannot stop me.
Scenario two - I am some mix engineer somewhere you hire to mix your album.
How about if I process your files through my hardware in my studio and charge you for my time and the use of my gear? Is that okay? Any ethical issues? Piracy?
Scenario three - I am some mix engineer somewhere. How about if I take the time to actually get the same mix settings on my hardware and instead make digital copies of them in Nebula and sell that to you instead of processing the files myself? Same cost, same time, same hardware.Is that now suddenly wrong? I could even suggest that I am backing up my hardware and making it available to you - just as an aside. You can resell your hardware legally right - no questions asked. But software is different. You know that right? You cannot just sell on your software if it is against the eula. You cannot sell on your digital copy of Michael Jacksons Thriller downloaded from Amazon. You can sell the physical CD no problem on Ebay. But not software. I am the creator of the software and ask that you don't upload to an online file sharing site in eula. But my software required my mind to tweak the knobs and then sample, edit and package. The hardware itself does nothing by itself but what I ask it to do. So really the intelectual property is in my mind in processing and packaging the software. And that I can protect. But an intangible, indefinite sound that requires a carrier that I create to even produce a tone? Without me, my sounds and my decisions, the hardware is silent

This is a bizarre dilemma but it is actually called progress IMHO. You can shoot film if you want but digital now makes sense. If I give you a 3D lut to make your digital video look like Kodak film stock have I violated IP? What if I do the same in sound. Superimpose a digital file on top of another digital file, do some calculations to get a desired result. Further more you can use kilometres of film or have voltage hungry hardware if you like but there is a price to pay. Digital is kinder to the environment. Now if tools emerge that allow us to get the sound of analog in digital should we not embrace them instead of simplifying the argument into a black and white issue, which it clearly is not and calling the people who serve you pirates?

More food for thought. Do people who borrow gear steal the makers intelectual property? I mean if you borrow your mates amp for your album is there an ethical issue to consider? Engineers always hire, borrow and lend gear for jobs and no one bats an eye lid.

Very murky water and I do not know how this will play out or if my defense is plausible. I would imagine that at least I have demonstrated that it is conplex. It is a very strange position we find ourselves in but please be careful how you perceive your developers, they are doing what every engineer has done for decades but only in a different way. We provide tones for you. . . and charge a fee. The method has changed but the craft remains the same. Yes we hire, borrow and buy gear to do that but show me where that is piracy?

If I were a hardware manufacturer I would get into the game. Lower prices to be more competitive or back Nebula because it is the best horse in the race with incredible potential for licensing deals with people. If they want their name associated with a library then they enter some official licensing deal with them. For example Abbey Road and Waves. If they don't, then what do I do? Name it differently. Simple. That's the reason I will not call my N**e pres ' The N**e ' pack for Nebula. If I never mention their name as an endorsement of my product then what's the beef?

DDMF came out with an eq based on the The Rupert N**e Designs 5033. Called it the 6144. RND had made a Yamaha version and charged the earth for it - over 500 US I think. DDMF version sounds incredibly close to the Yamaha version. Costs about 40 US. Don't know who sold more but it is a free market. I think RND got that one wrong and it opened the door for a competitor. Emulations of hardware will continue to come ( how many Pultec eq emulations exist ) and I believe that IK multimedia, Softube and other algorithmic plugin manufacturers send signals through gear at variable settings to help code their plugins? Are they pirates? It's all 1 s and 0s so in your eyes ours are unethical and theirs are fine?

I think it's worth calmy taking a step back and considering the vast picture. This is mirky water brother
User avatar
Henry Olonga
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:38 am
Location: South west England

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd party libraries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests