Testing the waters on piracy protection....

Quote from Michael_dk

I don't think there could be any violation of copyright. If there were, I'm sure they would have tried. Anyway, as Per pointed out, most amp designs (all?) are basically copies of the few original ones.

Quote from Michael_dk

This is the mentality that lead to the actions that this thread is about. Passive IDGAF attitude. If this is your stance than the "thief" is justified in it.

Quote from Michael_dk

All those boutique pedals? Copies. Basically. maybe some minor tweaks, but the basic circuitry is very rarely original. Is that stealing? No, not in the legal sense. In a moral sense, then? Guess that will always depend on one's viewpoint. Still, Marshall wouldn't exist without "inspiration" from Fender, etc...

I can't in any way equate profiles to illegal mp3 copies. You profile (the sound of!) an amp at a certain setting, through a certain mic, at a certain mic position. You don't get the whole amp, you get a "snapshot".

Quote from Michael_dk

So If a world renowned producer told you that he couldnt tell the difference between a real amp and the KPA, then would that change your mind? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb1zI6pEu0A#t=228 I think that would qualify as evidence.

Quote from Michael_dk

I have difficulties coming up with a suitable comparison. This is kind of unbroken ground. Maybe a band using the same chord progression as another band??? Nah, still doesn't sound right (though I do seem to remember Lars Ulrich trying to sue some band for using a lot of F# chords in their music...)

I don't understand this. It seems like some people feel that what Kemper and/or the commercial profilers are doing is morally suspect, but still you have bought the unit (I assume). I'm wondering about this? (genuinely, not trying to be smart)

Yup, and I love it, but I also love my wife and kids, but that love dosent guarantee that my family wouldnt fuck me over in the future. Just keeping on my toes if you dont mind.

Quote from Michael_dk

Words in red are mine.

Jasper this has been discussed many times since the introduction of the kemper profiler.
The conclusion since long is that: No, you can't copyright a sound. Harley Davidson tried and failed, and other companies have tried too I guess. Amp/brand names and logos can't often be used freely for commercial purpose.
Chord progressions are neither copy protected. A melody or song text is often protected and that cause legal problems.
See the link provided a few posts back.

Quote from Feck

With all due respect to ANYONE who takes the time to make a profile and share it (whether for free or for profit), the entire model of the KPA was designed specifically to encourage a community. It was born with a completely different intent than for-profit software development and sales. Trying to backtrack the KPA model into that of a capitalist, developer-to-consumer model just isn't realistic. Anyone who makes a set of profiles and attempts to sell them for a profit MUST know that there will be a certain amount of sharing/theft involved. And, without getting to deep on the subject, I think this is not entirely wrong to some degree. Again, when I bought a KPA (and I bought one on day 1) I knew CK was forming the rig sharing community and that the idea behind the unit was to SHARE. Not sell for profit. Now, if some people want to (and it's their right to) use the KPA platform as a way to make some extra cash, then so be it. But they have no RIGHT to absolute security - it was never, at least to my knowledge, advertised that the KPA would be a legitimate, secure way to make profits for any individual other than CK and team.

Feck, I think you're mixing a number of different issues here.
The risk/amount of piracy in the digital world has IMO nothing to do with the "original Kemper spirit", it's just something which happens. It happens in the realm of books, music and movies as well.
What you seem to imply is that professional profilers deserve to be pirated because they brought an unfair commercial aspect into the Kemper concept. Point is, you don't have to buy anything if you don't agree: you have free profiles, Factory profiles, you can as well profile your own stuff. Commercial profiles don't limit your user experience in any way.

You're saying that I can't start a touristic guide business because "places are public and streets are made to walk for free". You're saying the touristic guides I've written can be legitimately stolen or copied because I'm trying to earn money. Point is, I'm offering something which did not exist before, something you're free to refuse, something which no way limits your freedom or rights to walk among monuments in a city.
You're also saying that I can't sell apples from my tree because "it's something the nature gives for free". Point is, I planted the tree, I care after it, and the tree is on my land. And you find the apples behind the corner and you don't have to wake up at 5 and work the land.

Heck, I remember in the '70s people in Italy breaking the gates and entering venues for free because "music belongs to everyone": go and learn an instrument then LOL

Please keep in mind that people not only have any right to sell whatever they want as long as theirs is a fair trade, but they own what they have invented as well. Others stealing their work because they are jelous, poor or just unable to come up with anything good by rhemselves is a different story. Don't try to invent an ethic to justify a lack of ethic.

Peace

I wasn't saying you can't start a tourist guide business. What I was saying is that if you start one, you HAVE to build into your operating cost the fact that at least some people will want to either follow along for free, or walk close enough so as to get the experience without having to pay for it. This happens in my neighborhood in Chicago - many groups do big neighborhood/food tours, and you see some people straggling along just outside the horde in order to still get something from it. It is a public street, after all. I'm not inventing any ethic here, nor am I attempting to justify why some people think the way they do. I'm merely stating that, as it is, the KPA is a free, open source format (once you've bought the unit, that is) and as such, there will always be people who steal or share. And I'll straight up say it here - when I had spent a good amount of time making profiles of my amps (and I have some nice ones) when the KPA came out, I thought of selling them for a minute. And again when I re-did a bunch of them using over $20k worth of gear. But in the end, I took one for the team and put them up for free. I don't have a problem with people trying to make some money off of selling them. I do, however, think that it's pretty ridiculous for anyone to think that they absolutely DESERVE to get paid and have that enforced all the way to the copy protection level for offering the equivalents of what many others have done for free already. Remember that, no matter how much energy you put into a profile, YOU are the one who can use it forever in your musical endeavors, either on an amateur or professional level. If you can make some extra cash on it, great. If you are counting on that revenue to pay your bills, then you are going to find yourself in the middle of a decade long battle over digital property rights which even the largest corporations on the planet can't find a concrete answer to. Essentially, a "pay what you want" or a donation model will most likely end up being the way this whole endeavor should and will go, in my personal opinion. And this is from a guy with at least $1k already invested in third party profiles.

Quote from Feck

I wasn't saying you can't start a tourist guide business. What I was saying is that if you start one, you HAVE to build into your operating cost the fact that at least some people will want to either follow along for free, or walk close enough so as to get the experience without having to pay for it. This happens in my neighborhood in Chicago - many groups do big neighborhood/food tours, and you see some people straggling along just outside the horde in order to still get something from it. It is a public street, after all. I'm not inventing any ethic here, nor am I attempting to justify why some people think the way they do. I'm merely stating that, as it is, the KPA is a free, open source format (once you've bought the unit, that is) and as such, there will always be people who steal or share. And I'll straight up say it here - when I had spent a good amount of time making profiles of my amps (and I have some nice ones) when the KPA came out, I thought of selling them for a minute. And again when I re-did a bunch of them using over $20k worth of gear. But in the end, I took one for the team and put them up for free. I don't have a problem with people trying to make some money off of selling them. I do, however, think that it's pretty ridiculous for anyone to think that they absolutely DESERVE to get paid and have that enforced all the way to the copy protection level for offering the equivalents of what many others have done for free already. Remember that, no matter how much energy you put into a profile, YOU are the one who can use it forever in your musical endeavors, either on an amateur or professional level. If you can make some extra cash on it, great. If you are counting on that revenue to pay your bills, then you are going to find yourself in the middle of a decade long battle over digital property rights which even the largest corporations on the planet can't find a concrete answer to. Essentially, a "pay what you want" or a donation model will most likely end up being the way this whole endeavor should and will go, in my personal opinion. And this is from a guy with at least $1k already invested in third party profiles.

Feck, I get what you say and I agree with you 100%.

As people have said, i think its a moot issue as such a system will never be developed, as KPA aren't the ones losing out when people share profiles.

Really though, i think some peoples profiles are priced very high for what they are. We should remember that at best people are selling a snapshot of a (potentially) great amp/signal chain.

I'm not sure where the heat is even coming from, has anyone who creates and sells profiles even chimed in with a problem yet? As people have hinted at, selling profiles is never going to be huge business.

I don't know why this community is up in arms over the whole pirated profiles thing anymore. Have you seen how much piracy goes on outside of profiles? It's best to be in horse blinker mode, like I am all the time. I see the stuff, I realise that it's someone's work that has been stolen, I move on without thinking twice about it. I try and educate others, but not for a second do I believe that anyone gives a damn about what I say or that they'll not go back to doing it after I wander off.

It's one of the reason I supported "draconian" laws like SOPA and PIPA in the US. An unpopular stance, but I know that nothing short of legislation is going to make people realise that stealing an mp3 is equivalent to stealing a candy bar from a store. It's not treated like that in the eyes of the law, so it doesn't matter. But if there was indeed legislation that could punish you for that kind of activity, this kind of piracy would be stamped out in a few years.

It's on the horizon, believe me. There will be a tipping point when people realise that digital piracy of books and movies and music has actually ruined industries and doomed many of us to work manufacturing and other jobs, anything but creative industries. Forget all the arguments about finding alternative models of business and how Justin Biever is successful in these hard times (illuminati scumbag). When it comes, people will cry foul, say their rights are being taken away, etc, but it will be done nonetheless.

I had this dream about putting out an album. In fact, I've already written that album and I'm working on a second. I'm not releasing either though till things get better. After all, it's all about the music, right (great story, viabcroce)? I just feel that I don't need to share if that's the rationale.

Seriously, I feel that all these worries about piracy will eventually kill the commercial profiling industry too. You've already heard someone like Michael Wagener say that he's unconfident about doing a second profile pack because he doesn't think he'll make enough money on the first. I think other profile creators, like TAF or Sinmix or paults, will also shut their doors when they find theirs a torrent pack with all their profiles bundled in it on the web.

Then we'll all be sorry. But as Feck mentioned, it doesn't really bother me beyond a point. My reward for my honesty is a clean conscience. I only use free profiles because (a) I don't want to spend money on sounds, (b) I like what I already have. That doesn't preclude the possibility of my paying for something outstanding in future. But at the current juncture, I don't see any reason to get any reward for doing the right thing, which is just how so much of life is. Nor do I see a point in getting angry that others are getting for free what I paid for, it'll just add to your blood pressure and we all have to realise that this unsavoury activity has been going on for a long time now, so no use in building up blood pressure.

I honestly miss the 80s. Even tape trading wasn't like this. You would at least buy a few tapes, everybody did. Now people take and take and take and never give a thing back.

The whole piracy thing is an interesting issue.

I'm in a band myself, and as we've only being releasing music about 5 years, we're at the stage where we'd rather people had our music for free than not have it because they can't afford it or feel guilty about free downloading. I think pay what you want is the future for music.

IMO, i put more of the blame on bands/musicians than on the consumers themselves. Its just far too easy these days to be in a touring band and get your music "out there" with the internet, the world is awash in a sea of utterly awful music. I don't REMEMBER the last time i was at a gig where i didn't think at least 50% of the bands were either utterly awful, a direct copycat of another band, or a combination of the two. Its NO SURPRISE that consumers stick with whats forced down their throats by the media, when you consider the utter drivel they're forced to sit through if they do take a punt on a night of "local/unsigned/etc" bands.

Another part of the issue IMO is the industry refusing the move with the times. For eg, streaming TV. If someone put out a service that streamed everything, in HD, quickly after release, i'd be happy to pay a decent amount for it. I'm NOT about to pay netflix whatever it is they charge for their awful service; Random programs shown for random amounts of time.

People get upset when they can't make money in the same way/volume they used to be able to. Maybe the solution should be to find new business models rather than trying to prosecute college students who download game of thrones.

I will however always think the assertation that downloading an MP3 is analogous with stealing a physical product is ridiculous, archaic thinking. Its just not. If someone stole your ferrari you'd be very upset. If someone was able to copy your ferrari and drive off in the copy, I'd imagine you'd be less upset. I'm not JUSTIFYING piracy, i'm just saying theres a good reason police are more concerned with shoplifters than with digital pirates.

Quote from Ingolf

Feck, I get what you say and I agree with you 100%.

Really? Profilers have to expect to be pirated *because* the Profiler was born as an open platform?
And who says it was open, BTW? Like in music, some authors publish their music for free, some others ask for money. It's not up to you or me to discuss what they do: if you don't agree, do not buy. Professional profilers are no way limiting the free offers: they are rather helping raising the bar, in fact free profiles produced lately have a much higher quality than before.

Feck, your people are not just listening to the guide's words for free, they are stealing copies of the guide book. What's worst, many of them are reselling them for a profit.

Quote from chamelious

I will however always think the assertation that downloading an MP3 is analogous with stealing a physical product is ridiculous, archaic thinking. Its just not. If someone stole your ferrari you'd be very upset. If someone was able to copy your ferrari and drive off in the copy, I'd imagine you'd be less upset. I'm not JUSTIFYING piracy, i'm just saying theres a good reason police are more cversus oncerned with shoplifters than with digital pirates.

Here we go again.

It's easy to say, but you can't make copies of cars and washing machines or refrigerators for that matter. You can only copy things which involve intellectual property, surprise surprise. Does that mean intellectual property has no value? I strongly disagree that just because something can be digitised, that doesn't mean you can and should own it. It's only the creative arts that are suffering, not stuff like white goods manufacturing. If the mindset continues, it will be impossible to earn a living from creative things and we will all have to work in manufacturing. Meanwhile, companies with the means to wage IP war are throttling growth of products that are better and faster, simply because they have the means to do so. So there's no point in crying foul about how music is dying with all the Bievers and Jepsens around. You made it happen.

You mentioned the prosecution that happened with Game of Thrones piracy. So a parallel with shoplifting can be drawn, I would think. It's just that there aren't many laws right now and there are huge pressure groups that want this sort of thing to go on, but I honestly support the idea of stronger net policing to stop things like illegal file sharing and child pornography. The terms of use when you buy a CD are printed on the back: you own a copy, you do not own the right to do whatever you like with someone else's work.

Quote from viabcroce

Really? Profilers have to expect to be pirated *because* the Profiler was born as an open platform?
And who says it was open, BTW? Like in music, some authors publish their music for free, some others ask for money. It's not up to you or me to discuss what they do: if you don't agree, do not buy. Professional profilers are no way limiting the free offers: they are rather helping raising the bar, in fact free profiles produced lately have a much higher quality than before.

Feck, you people are not just listening to the guide's words for free, they are stealing copies of the guide book. What's worst, many of them are reselling them for a profit.

I think you are misinterpreting what Feck and Ingolf are saying. He's not saying it is right, he is merely pointing out that this is something that there is no way to crackdown on profile piracy, just like there has been no way to crackdown on other digital piracy.

I don't think tying profiles to a mac address would work either. It'll end up being more of an irritant for everyone else. That said, I don't mind the iLok on my Cubase copy at all.

Quote from Michael_dk

These technical considerations aside, what is everybody's opinion on this?

My opinion of this is that piracy protections don't stop pirates and make regular users lives difficult. I don't want this "feature" implemented in Kemper. Waste of resources and processing power.

Quote from mdeeRocks

My opinion of this is that piracy protections don't stop pirates and make regular users lives difficult. I don't want this "feature" implemented in Kemper. Waste of resources and processing power.

Yep exactly this a cracker will crack it what ever it is

Quote from nightlight

I think you are misinterpreting what Feck and Ingolf are saying. He's not saying it is right, he is merely pointing out that this is something that there is no way to crackdown on profile piracy, just like there has been no way to crackdown on other digital piracy.

Thanks. Exactly this.

I could also play the advocatus diaboli/ devil's advocate here.
I could say: Every time when money gets involved things get spoiled.

This is of course generalizing and it is NOT (please note : NOT) my personal point of view, but it bears some truth nonetheless.

What I see among the Kemper community sounds almost like a fairytale story:
In the beginning there was the free sharing of profiles, everybody was happy about the efforts that other users put in.
Then came the 'commercial' profilers.
Soon the general consensus became that they 'raised the bar' and how free profiles could never compete with commercial ones, almost like a myth created.
Then people got jealous, and greedy.
Everybody wanted commercial profiles, wanted them so bad now.
They started to steal and share commercial profiles.
And in the end?
What will it be?
Will it be an analogon to the rise and fall of a society?
I hope not.
I hope, like I said before, that eventually a general consensus will be established among the community that every profile, any effort by any user, is worth the same.
If it will be useful to me and my needs is secondary.
Lots of them inevitably will not be my cup of tea.
But to others they will.

This is not what Feck said; if that was the case, there would have been no need for premising that the profiles world was born to be free:

Quote

the entire model of the KPA was designed specifically to encourage a community. It was born with a completely different intent than for-profit software development and sales. Trying to backtrack the KPA model into that of a capitalist, developer-to-consumer model just isn't realistic. Anyone who makes a set of profiles and attempts to sell them for a profit MUST know that there will be a certain amount of sharing/theft involved.

I'd like to understand the relationship between the Profiling community being born to be free and the freedom to illegally share profiles.
Feck uses the first part of his statement in order to backup the second part. His "a capitalistic approach is not fair" should then justify the statement that theft is unavoidable. If he just wanted to say that in the digital realm illegal copies are somehow normal (which I take for granted), there would be no need for the first part.

Since theft is unavoidable in every instance of the digital realm (so that it should be obvious and not worth mentioning), he's saying that thieves behave well when they steal profiles (unlike with stealing mp3s), because selling profiles is unethical at the root.

I missing how one can justify stealing a profile but not a song. Feck seems to justify this by stating that profiles have to be free, which is the same thing (some) people used to say in Italy in the '70s when bursting venues because "popular music has to be free".

PS: Feck, nothing personal dude, this is just for discussion's sake.
Also, I edited a typo in my original post, where I misspelled "your people" with "you people", giving my sentence an unwanted aggressive tone. I was referring to those who steal guidebooks

@ chamelious: strange that you miss the critical point here: if you clone someone else's car you're not damaging the owner, but those who sell it.
Maybe you'd have never be able to afford a Ferrari, so you're not actually eating up market shares. But if you start selling your clones, many people who would have bought them will be more than happy to spend a fraction of the cost and buy your clone.

Since this is a free community, anybody is entitled to sell things as long as the market is fair. And anybody is free to decide whether to give them money for something extra, or not.
Commercial profiles IMO don't touch the freedom of the community nor its original spirit, which is apparently living well (RE is constantly growing).

Peace

Gotta say that while the commercial profiles are nice, the free ones are also great. I was opposed to there being commercial profiles in the first place as it wasn't in keeping with the spirit of the thing, but you can't stop people from leveraging a market if they want to and if others are willing to pay.

Personally I don't think commercial profiles are inherently any better than free ones. I simply think they have better presentation, curation and quality control. In the free rig exchange there's a higher percentage of poorer profiles than in a purchased pack of profiles, but the good profiles are no better in either case and there are plenty of those, it just takes slightly more effort to audition and there aren't any demos for you to hear how they sound first.

I also agree with others who believe that with profiles piracy protection will likely only penalise non pirates. Even if you had a digital signature for each customer, so you could see who pirated and gave away your profiles, what then? The cost of going to court is prohibitive in nearly every country for something as tiny as this, you'll never recoup your money.