MW RokPak - Profiles for Kemper Profiling Amplifiers

    Quote from mwagener

    Because of legal considerations, we unfortunately can no longer include the Chandler and Wizard profiles in the RokPak ... For copyright reason we also won’t be able to display pictures of certain other amps as we had originally planned ... we also won’t be able to display pictures of certain other amps as we had originally planned. We are sorry for the inconvenience.


    Michael,


    Oh, no - I thought the industry had long moved past this. Was the Chandler amp the GAV19T? I'm aware that Brainworx has a licensed plugin for that via Universal Audio (three profiles of which can be found in the Rig Exchange) but I'm not aware of a similar situation with Wizard Amps. I doubt that claims based on either would hold water, provided that the models were billed as "In The Style Of..." and the photos were your own. But I also know that merely the threat of getting lawyers involved would be enough to kill a project like this. How did these concerns come to your attention, Michael? I'm not saying that a corporate shaming is in order, but considering that neither intellectual nor design issues are at stake the only issue remaining might be trademark infringement - and that's an easy one to sidestep.


    Perhaps those profiles could be released as Bonus Amps and tagged as Mystery Amp One and Two. The photos could be a silhouette of Sherlock Holmes, along with tonal description hinting at what they are (which is essentially what every modelling amp company did before Line 6 grew a pair and solved the problem with a disclaimer.) 8o


    -djh

    Bummer! Sure glad I dont believe in prepaying for things .


    Well at least we now have an inkling as to why maybe Kemper was holding off with the FREE versions release. Lawyers......

    Edited once, last by lasvideo ().

    MW proposes to refund if this new announced bothers you.


    But, I do not still understand copyright issues about a profile. Ok, you propably do not stick the amp name on the profile (poor andy how had to change his entire web sibe to add "based on" every where). But why removing it ?


    BTW, Mr Wagener, you should also make some change on your web site and add these "based on [AMP]", or "this [AMP] was used to create"


    About pictures of the amps, OK picures are always cool, but the settings themselves are more important.

    Yeah, there is no legal precedent thus far which I am aware of. The KPA itself is a device which captures sounds, not legally intellectual property. I know Wade from Chandler started a legal action against someone else using IP belonging to Abbey Road or Chandler based on a long thread on Gearslutz - so it seems he might be quite the litigious businessman. Regardless, I don't claim to know on what level MW and crew have been contacted about this whole endeavor, but I will say that if a third party is clamping down on the process of profiling and advertising said profiles, I do wonder what that means for the future of the profiling "industry".

    Quote from Feck

    Yeah, there is no legal precedent thus far which I am aware of. The KPA itself is a device which captures sounds, not legally intellectual property. I know Wade from Chandler started a legal action against someone else using IP belonging to Abbey Road or Chandler based on a long thread on Gearslutz - so it seems he might be quite the litigious businessman. Regardless, I don't claim to know on what level MW and crew have been contacted about this whole endeavor, but I will say that if a third party is clamping down on the process of profiling and advertising said profiles, I do wonder what that means for the future of the profiling "industry".


    Yeah this is a little worrying??? I know Andy from TAF has been contacted about using branded names on his web site. Obviously the amp companies are worried because the KPA sounds so close to the original amp. But I don't know how you can copyright a sound ??

    Quote from Raoul23

    Yeah this is a little worrying??? I know Andy from TAF has been contacted about using branded names on his web site. Obviously the amp companies are worried because the KPA sounds so close to the original amp. But I don't know how you can copyright a sound ??


    A major league high profile lawsuit where Harley Davidson suggested infringement of exhaust sound by another manufacturer failed.


    The issue comes down to use of name and model and use of an image of the product to encourage sales is likely the grounds some manufacturers are suggesting as infringement.


    The fact of the matter is defending one's self in a legal action can be very expensive and repeated lawsuits can overwhelm a small cottage industry.


    The bottom line isn't the right or wrong of an issue as much as it can be the amount of money involved in defending the right or wrong of it can exceed any profit possible to be realized.

    Edited once, last by 1fastdog ().

    Just to clear up the issue:


    Wade (Chandler) and I are very good friends and I absolutely love everything Wade makes. Wade asked me nicely to take the profile down for totally legit reasons ,not to be discussed here, and since I really value our friendship I honored his request. Similar situation with Wizard. It's a bummer and cost me a ton of time and money, but it also woke me up to the fact that I might be trampling on somebody's copyright/trademark etc. So I got a written OK from as many manufacturers as I could, and most of them didn't have a problem. On the other hand, there was just no way to get in touch with some of the big ones, like Marshall, Fender, VOX (!), Orange etc.. Those profiles are still in the Paks, but have been given their own special name and I will not deliver any pictures of those amps with the profiles.


    In order to replace Wizard and Chandler (those profiles have been completely removed) I did new profiles with a 1965 VOX greyplate, a 1968 Fender Bandmaster, an early Fender Deluxe Blackface and a Fender Twin, because I saw there were request here on the forum for some of these. I also added a second profile of the ADA MP-1 without using the Furman PQ-3 in front of it. It is a bit darker sounding, because of the missing EQ, but you get a more pure sound of the actual amp. The good news is that the Studio Pak now has 101 profiles and Über Pak now has 204 profiles total.


    There is no problem with profiling amps, the problem starts when those profiles are being offered for money. I see there are well over 5000 free profiles on the rig exchange, which makes the KPA THE most versatile piece of gear in my studio if not on the market today. I understand that there is a fear amongst the amp manufacturers that this could cut into their business. Thankfully most manufacturers I talked to are embracing the profiler, and are using it as advertising for their gear, something the Record companies should have done when MP3 came out. Some of them are even looking at putting together their own profile library for sale.


    I offered to pay the money back to everybody who has pre-ordered if they can't live without the two removed profiles, no questions asked, just contact us with your order number via the website and we get it taken care of. I am posting updated amp lists on the website later today, so after today the issue should be off the table.


    We hope you will enjoy the new profiles.


    Cheers
    Michael

    Quote from mwagener


    There is no problem with profiling amps, the problem starts when those profiles are being offered for money. I see there are well over 5000 free profiles on the rig exchange, which makes the KPA THE most versatile piece of gear in my studio if not on the market today. I understand that there is a fear amongst the amp manufacturers that this could cut into their business. Thankfully most manufacturers I talked to are embracing the profiler, and are using it as advertising for their gear, something the Record companies should have done when MP3 came out. Some of them are even looking at putting together their own profile library for sale.

    Sooo........if this is the case couldn't the Chandler and wizard profiles be given out for free in the KPA MW pak ? ; :P ;)

    Quote from millstudios

    Sooo........if this is the case couldn't the Chandler and wizard profiles be given out for free in the KPA MW pak ? ; :P ;)


    Since you seemed to miss why MW stated he is not including those amps... here is that info again...


    "Wade (Chandler) and I are very good friends and I absolutely love everything Wade makes. Wade asked me nicely to take the profile down for totally legit reasons ,not to be discussed here, and since I really value our friendship I honored his request. Similar situation with Wizard."

    ... regardless if anyone ask for money for profiles or shares them for free - no one has the right to use the brand name or show pictures with logos from other companies.


    We will surely see much more trouble about this in the future.....


    I can only strongly advice everybody to remove any 'real names' from their profiles, profile description or even web site - and remove ALL pictures showing amp logos or names.


    It does not matter if the pictures where taken by the profile creator or not.
    This would be a problem of copyright (to use pictures created by others) - but here we talk about problems with brand names and logos.


    No one has to be afraid to profile any amp - but use your own names!

    (All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners, which are in no way associated or affiliated with soundside.de)


    Great Profiles --> soundside.de

    Edited 2 times, last by Armin ().

    so this now comes with vintage vox and fenders, oh my, that just sealed the justifications for recently buying the pack. thankyou sooo much for doing those, adds a nice bit of variation :thumbup:


    Hi Armin -- you do a great job with editing the images of amps on your website. But you still use the names -- wouldn't it be extremely hard to sell your profiles if customers didn't know what amps the profiles corresponded to? I suppose you could always say "based on," but that doesn't get around the issue of needing to use the name itself.