Plugin Piracy Thread

[Dom Mcsweeney]

with the sole intent of Copying my amp and running in stereo so I dont have to spend another 3k on the actual amp that im copying.

sound guy: Woah that's so sick... stereo is so totally awesome.

also sound guy: "mixes everything in mono"

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It's a device that literally copies someone else's work. Yes, im aware you cant trademark an amp schematic, unfortunate for some amp builders and a blessing for other amp builders. But to deny that the Kemper or Quad isn't doing exactly what it was designed to do is complete insanity.

Like I said where do you draw the line when it comes to morality. I really dont care, ive owned a Kemper and im on the waiting list for the QC mini with the sole intent of Copying my amp and running in stereo so I dont have to spend another 3k on the actual amp that im copying.

You're out of your mind

 

[LP59]

Again, not interested in "case" nor anything related to law. How do you argue that it's not creative? In this instance the machine is created in order to make this sound exactly like it is, it is it's core function and a lot to do with its intrinsic value.

A machine producing a sound is not a creative act. That means the sound that comes from an amp is not intellectual property any more than the sound of a kazoo is. It's the design of the amp that is the intellectual property, not the sound produced by it. It's the audio plugin that is the intellectual property, not the sound it makes.

The ethics and legality surrounding this issue were resolved long ago.

 

[SillyOctpuss]

I'm waiting for someone to claim Slash stole Marshalls IP because he used a borrowed amp that he hadn't paid for to record an album and the album reproduces the sound of the amp.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I'm waiting for someone to claim Slash stole Marshalls IP because he used a borrowed amp that he hadn't paid for to record an album and the album reproduces the sound of the amp.

View attachment 59766

Whenever there’s a chance to make a big reach, people here will do it.

 

[maddnotez]

You're out of your mind

Ok, then please tell me what exactly a Kemper or a Quad Cortex does.

 

[maddnotez]

sound guy: Woah that's so sick... stereo is so totally awesome.

also sound guy: "mixes everything in mono"

Bass player: I cant hear you
Drummer: I cant either

 

[Tito83]

I think in every example you've mentioned, you're morally wrong, if you think taking something that they're charging for for free is acceptable.

I have to say I'm rather confused by this. I haven't given any example that I think it's ok to take something anyone is selling. So I'm morally correct? That's it?

You've already been told multiple times that a sound made isn't the same thing as the device making it. I don't know how else to phrase it.

Me being told something is vastly different than someone giving me a fair and reasonable logical argument in order to justify it. I'm still waiting for that. People tried pointing out noise from motorcycles, which is not the same because the amp acts a modifier to the guitar sound that imparts a particular quality that has intrinsic value.

Law, ethics, and morality aren't exactly the same thing, but the former is based on the latter two. The fact that people for decades have not morally or ethically equated capturing, profiling, and modeling to thievery is why there also isn't a law against it anywhere in the world (to my knowledge).

The fact that it's illegal to pirate software nearly everywhere in the world as well also lines up to the moral and ethical compass of the people making those laws. They're not going to say "well, we think it's fucking swell to steal other people's hard work. But let's make it illegal anyway."

Sort of, sometimes. So you're saying if something takes a long time to be corrected by the law it means that it's ok? It took a lot longer to slavery be against the law. I don't see this as being relevant.

The fact that you think they line up without any real logical argument from your part ends up being mere chance and irrelevant. It's saying you're right because you agree with everyone else.

A machine producing a sound is not a creative act. That means the sound that comes from an amp is not intellectual property any more than the sound of a kazoo is. It's the design of the amp that is the intellectual property, not the sound produced by it. It's the audio plugin that is the intellectual property, not the sound it makes.

The ethics and legality surrounding this issue were resolved long ago.

A motorcycle making an engine noise as by-product is not the same as a musical instrument. You saying a machine producing sound isn't creative art is your opinion. I'll even grant that it's the opinion of the majority apparently and it can even be accepted as such by the law - it is still not an reasonable logical argument.

It's as it is because hey, world has got to go and won't stop, that does not mean the way we treat this matter today is the right one. Still not a good argument for it.

 

[ian_dissonance]

Everyone just buy your fucking plugins.

 

[FracKing]

Is taking a photograph of a beautiful piece of architecture stealing?

Some structures are protected by copyright law if your intention is commercial.

Example in Belgium is the Atomium...:

"Taking photos of the Atomium for private, non-commercial use (like personal social media) is generally allowed, but the image is protected by copyright until 2075. Commercial, advertising, or professional use of the image requires prior permission from the Atomium's copyright holder. Personal photography is okay; selling them is not."

 

[maddnotez]

Some structures are protected by copyright law if your intention is commercial.

Example in Belgium is the Atomium...:

"Taking photos of the Atomium for private, non-commercial use (like personal social media) is generally allowed, but the image is protected by copyright until 2075. Commercial, advertising, or professional use of the image requires prior permission from the Atomium's copyright holder. Personal photography is okay; selling them is not."

Ooof

Thats funny and glad you knew this because while we are sitting here comparing pictures to guitar amps for whatever reason, that is kind of the foot in mouth I like to see.

The only difference is someone else's opinion. Laws, morality, it's all the same. Some person decided what is and what isn't. Doesn't mean it is fact.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I have to say I'm rather confused by this. I haven't given any example that I think it's ok to take something anyone is selling. So I'm morally correct? That's it?



Me being told something is vastly different than someone giving me a fair and reasonable logical argument in order to justify it. I'm still waiting for that. People tried pointing out noise from motorcycles, which is not the same because the amp acts a modifier to the guitar sound that imparts a particular quality that has intrinsic value.



Sort of, sometimes. So you're saying if something takes a long time to be corrected by the law it means that it's ok? It took a lot longer to slavery be against the law. I don't see this as being relevant.

The fact that you think they line up without any real logical argument from your part ends up being mere chance and irrelevant. It's saying you're right because you agree with everyone else.



A motorcycle making an engine noise as by-product is not the same as a musical instrument. You saying a machine producing sound isn't creative art is your opinion. I'll even grant that it's the opinion of the majority apparently and it can even be accepted as such by the law - it is still not an reasonable logical argument.

It's as it is because hey, world has got to go and won't stop, that does not mean the way we treat this matter today is the right one. Still not a good argument for it.

JFC. You’re all over the place, dude. Have a nice day.

 

[Tito83]

JFC. You’re all over the place, dude. Have a nice day.

You too.

Everyone just buy your fucking plugins.

Or I can just download the community approved NAM and have unending perfectly ethical copies of the non copyrightable tones of every plugin or amp one can imagine, 100% legally, without having to pay anything. And there's no obvious contradictions and gray areas there because a good boy like me can't do no wrong.

 

[paisleywookiee]

You too.



Or I can just download the community approved NAM and have unending perfectly ethical copies of the non copyrightable tones of every plugin or amp one can imagine, 100% legally, without having to pay anything. And there's no obvious contradictions and gray areas there because a good boy like me can't do no wrong.

This is why I'm not even clear what point you're trying to make is. Is it really just the capture/profiling thing? I thought this thread was about pirating paid plugins.

 

[Tito83]

This is why I'm not even clear what point you're trying to make is. Is it really just the capture/profiling thing? I thought this thread was about pirating paid plugins.

If only there was a plugin that could copy exactly what the other one does - then both, profiling and plugin piracy, could be related... If only.

 

[paisleywookiee]

If only there was a plugin that could copy exactly what the other one does both, profiling and plugin piracy, could be related... If only.

That's not what this is about though. This thread is about not paying for something that people are charging money for, and doing so by circumventing copy protection. Are you for, or against that? Any analogies aren't really relevant here. You're either okay with stealing, or you aren't.

 

[JiveTurkey]

Stealing software is illegal.

Stealing an actual guitar amp is illegal.

Capturing/profiling/modeling an amp is not.

If we're being literal; you probably should have watched a few more cartoons

 

[paisleywookiee]

Capturing/profiling/modeling an amp is not.

That isn't what this thread is about either. However, not only do I think profiling/capturing/modeling is not morally wrong, neither does Mesa Boogie, Engl, Fender, Orange, etc.

 

[Tito83]

That's not what this is about though. This thread is about not paying for something that people are charging money for, and doing so by circumventing copy protection. Are you for, or against that? Any analogies aren't really relevant here. You're either okay with stealing, or you aren't.

To me anyone that says they are against plugin piracy and yet use profiles of paid plugins and anything else really are just kidding themselves. Cognitive bias is real.

 

[JiveTurkey]

To me anyone that says they are against plugin piracy and yet use profiles of paid plugins and anything else really are just kidding themselves. Cognitive bias is real.

Who's doing this in this thread?