[LAU] creating open source sample libs. (Was: Re: Experiment One - For Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra. Music and a short review of the sample library)

Marcel Bonnet marcelbonnet at gmail.com
Thu Aug 16 13:42:41 UTC 2012

On 16 August 2012 10:11, Marcel Bonnet <marcelbonnet at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 August 2012 08:35, Paul Davis <paul at linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Nils <list at nilsgey.de> wrote:
>>> Am Wed, 15 Aug 2012 23:22:22 -0300
>>> schrieb Marcel Bonnet <marcelbonnet at gmail.com>:
>>> > Hi, there.
>>> > What about these samples
>>> >
>>> > http://www.philharmonia.co.uk/thesoundexchange/make_music/samples/library/
>>> > ?
>>> >
>>> > "License: You are free to use these samples as you wish, including
>>> > releasing them as part of a commercial work. The only restriction is
>>> > they must not be sold or made available 'as is' (i.e. as sampler or as
>>> > a sampler instrument)."
>>> >
>>> > I'm just starting with them. I think any linuxsampler user probably
>>> > knows, but what do you guys think of these samples? Does it meet the
>>> > tech and license requirements? My first bad impression is about the
>>> > sample format, they are all distributed as MP3 - I would consider a
>>> > non compressed format instead.
>>> Hello Marcel,
>>> the License means that you can't compile the samples in soundfont,
>>> gigastudio, kontakt etc. file. I guess the intention of the license is
>>> to prevent .sfz as well, although technically you could argue that the
>>> samples are still "as is" in sfz format, there is only a meta file
>>> added. But the same is true if you compress them and include metadata,
>>> so the case could be made for any sampler format.
>> if you really wanted to set things up so that many people could use them,
>> you could distribute them as-is with a script that generated an sfz, or as a
>> script that fetched them from the original site, and then generated an sfz.
>> the license wording though is really non-sensical, and in fact as it is
>> written, my interpretation would be "you cannot give these to anyone else in
>> the form in which you have received them ("as-is") - if you distribute them
>> it must be free of charge and in some OTHER format".
> Thanks, folks. This topic is really making me understand the legal and
> tech problems in another way.
> I think I did not paid enough attention to the "as-is" problem,
> because I found - can't remember where - some brass and strings GIG
> files, using the mentioned London Philharmonia samples...
> --
> Marcel Bonnet

FYI: back to the philharmonia site, I decided to take a loot at
http://www.philharmonia.co.uk/thesoundexchange/terms_and_conditions/ ,
see this item:

4. In accessing the Philharmonia website you agree to access the
contents solely for your own personal, non-commercial use. You are not
permitted to copy, download, store in any medium (including any other
website), distribute, transmit, broadcast, show in public, adapt or
change in any way any part of the Philharmonia website for any other
purpose without the prior written permission of Philharmonia or in
accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or other
applicable law.

So it seems illegal to make a script to download the samples, as
suggested by Paul :(

So they give us samples, they all know their samples are going to be
used in recordings, but every user must repeat the same damn job to
package the samples into a sampler. It's not reasonable to me.

Marcel Bonnet

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list