Appalling fraud and theft

  • Remember, the original point of this thread was the outrage of "commercial" profile sellers had when someone copied and distributed their profiles. Not, whether it is ethical to copy a tone to make a profile in the first place.


    I think it's important to acknowledge the similarity between the morality/ethics of each activity.

  • Personally I am opposed to all IP law, but I respect everyone involved in creating IP. I surely won't be pirating profiles (especially ones I actually would purchase) because I want to incentivize those profile authors to make more. Also, I don't want to get sued or go to jail.


    However, in the absence of IP laws, that doesn't mean profile authors can't make money - they just have to adapt. They might try to raise funds in advance of a particular release, distribute their wares with ads, or even get Kemper to change the software to force commercial profiles to be serial numbered and registered.


    As for copying amps, the KPA does not copy amps. It merely emulates the sonic signature of an entire rig at particular settings/environment. That's a big difference. However, even if the KPA completely copied amps, I would support it. It's a better paradigm in my mind - cheaper, more versatile, lighter, smaller, less maintenance. If the amp manufacturers go the way of the horse and buggy industries, so be it. I'm happy with automobiles and KPA's!!!! I don't owe Marshall anything if I want my KPA to make a Marshall sound. I would never buy a Marshall amp, given their prices.


    IP law is always lauded for encouraging innovation. But does it really? Where's the proof? You can be theoretical and say well it creates __ incentive. Well, what about all the cases where IP law stifles innovation? There's clearly plenty. There is no academic study that gives any good estimate of the costs and benefits. I suggest reading Against Intellectual Monopoly, and Against Intellectual Property. Both can be found for free on the web. One is a utilitarian and the other a property-rights theoretical view of IP.


    The idea that unlawfully gaining access to IP is exactly the same as theft is ridiculous. It's the same thing as "stealing" jobs. In other words, let's impede all technological progress because it might have negative outcomes for existing players.


  • I see many examples of IP rights used to stifle innovation in my day job, but on the whole I think IP has been a social good. I'll take a look at the materials you point to but am skeptical.

  • Im not gonna try to argue my side of things - im here to have fun and talk kemper. I also dont have time for a super detailed internet argument. I just wanted to let ppl know my views. I was not anti-ip law until i read the books mentioned.


    Of all my political greivances, ip law is very very low priority. I just want to make sure that people understand nobody owes anyone anything based on one's indirect utility of a product. And no ones business deserves legal protection from competition thy happens to have a technological edge. I know that seems obvious but many posts dip into those waters unintentionally.

  • My last 2 cents, I promisse.
    What If I profile a profile (using 2 kempers). According to what was said before, new bits and bytes would make the profiles mine. That being said, I would able to share the profiles I created with the other KPA. :whistling:

  • Hey fenix, I am not sure if you are correct. I know that the output of PATENTED devices is not covered by the original patent. However, COPYRIGHT is different. Derivative works of a copyrighted work are still covered by the original copyright. If I take a picture of a copyrighted image, then photoshop the crap out of my photo, I still can't legally distribute it (unless it falls under "fair use" exclusions). Even if I don't even use a device but simple memory and later paint the image, I still can't legally distribute it. Copyright protects against copying, regardless of the means and the "quality" of the copy. So long as your goal is to copy a copyrighted work, it doesn't matter if it's bit-accurate or not, or whether you transformed the profile into audio form and back into a profile or just copied the file on your computer.


    The irony of if this were actually applied is that software-based amplifiers could not legally be profiled, while real amps are fair game. But why SHOULD they fall into different classifications?


    Which raises the question of whether or not profiles of the Axe II are legal or not. It'd be the same way with 2 KPA's for copyrighted profiles.


    Ultimately, I think Kemper should change their software to give commercial profilers some means of forcing registration on their profiles. This avoids the IP issue altogether - just make it impossible, then it doesn't matter if it's legal or illegal.

  • I see your point. IMO we cant be so strict to law. Thats why I said that the principle is the same (copy a sound). IMO, wouldnt be right.
    Commercial software would be nice =) An idea would be to lock a profile to a KPA, for exemple.

  • Wow. Have you ever created anything in your life? Let's say you were an author and wrote an awesome novel that people all around the world wanted to buy and read - would you be cool with me copying the entire thing, putting my name on the cover, and then selling it myself? I mean, you'd just have to adapt, right?!


    LOL.

  • indravayu, i said earlier i'm not looking to argue this issue here point by point, but i encourage you to actually do some research on the subject rather than present a simple hypothetical as though it were a complete argument. there are plenty examples of publishers operating successful businesses outside of IP protection. and the issue goes far beyond the one example you've given.


    I also wrote this site:
    foobazaar.com/podhd/toneGuide


    and I am a software programmer, an industry that has numerous success stories using proprietary and free software.


    but conflating the merits of an idea with the merits of the person that presents an idea is a logical fallacy. It doesn't matter if I wrote 3 dozen top ten songs or I've never worked a day in my life.

  • I just find it hard to find the justification in 3rd parties trying to sell profiles. Especially at the high cost some of them are charging.


    To me, its a bit a "copy of a copy" scenario. Granted, the hard work and good gear make your copy very good, but I too find it a dubious market to support.


    I mean, why doesnt everyone then stop uploading free profiles and set up their own commercial profiles page? It would then:
    1 - Force prices down, due to increased competition
    2 - Force better profiling by the "non-studio" owning people (ie, the everyday-man) in order to stand out or make a name as a "good" profiler
    3 - It may even force the commercial guys to give it away for free as otherwise, they'd be buried between the rest of the profiles.



    The simple fact is that, when you start charging for something, people automatically assign more value to it. Its a fact. Im not saying that "higher asking cost = better profile", as expectation rises also. But having value in your work makes others also have value in your work. But is it really "their" work to be selling?



    To be perfectly honest, I bought a KPA over a real amp, and have never looked back. I know Im not the only one, and yes, it has cost the amp makers a sale.
    I honestly dont think I'd ever go back to a "real" amp ever again....or at least in the foreseeable future. Thats just how good technology, and in particular the KPA, has made it for us.


    We truly live in great guitar-gear times! :)

  • "I just find it hard to find the justification in 3rd parties trying to sell profiles"


    I do. I don't have space and time for all this studio gear they already have. I also don't have expertise.


    Also, I think for many of them it's nothing more than just a hobby, I'd not think it brings any noticeable income besides covering the costs of profiling.


    Please note that I don't judge if these should be sold or not.. I am impartial to it.