EnochLight wrote:
"3.1 You retain all of your ownership rights in the Content that you create or upload to the Sharing Services. However, by uploading Content you grant every user and Propellerhead a non-exclusive right to use your music (with the right to sublicense). The license includes a right to copy, reproduce, communicate to the public, distribute, prepare derivative works of, modify and adapt your Content – even for commercial purposes – in any and all media and distribution methods and to the extent permitted by the Terms of Service. The license applies worldwide and is royalty-free and irrevocable."
JNeffLind wrote:
I'm not trying to be argumentative (tone is often lost on forums), but I'm legitimately curious. If the license is "irrevocable" and it grants the right "to copy, reproduce, communicate to the public, distribute, prepare derivative works of, modify and adapt your Content – even for commercial purposes – in any and all media and distribution methods and to the extent permitted by the Terms of Service" then how is it that you own it. Is this legal double talk or am I missing something? It seems like saying you own a house but everyone can use it whenever they want, rent it out to their drunk uncle, remodel it, but they can't keep you from doing the same. What am I missing? Any lawyers here?
Greetings!
No worries - I realize you're not being argumentative at all. It's all good!
While I am not a lawyer, I have dealt with my fair share of contractual agreements between parties who work together in a profession. It's not legal double-talk; it's just Propellerhead's way of taking themselves out of the loop and not being responsible for copyright/licensing disputes between artists who do use the service.
One can maintain ownership of their work and still have every commercial right to selling it, while at the same time giving others a non-exclusive right to do the same. If it was exclusive, then only one person (or however many are licensed) could use it anyway they see fit.
No one knows for sure the reasoning behind the choice of handling licensing/copyright the way that Discover does except for Propellerhead, but I feel it's safe to assume that they wanted to nurture an environment where people could download and manipulate stuff without any fear of legal woes.
Think of Discover like one, big, ever-evolving Factory Sound Bank of patches that the community contributes.
Anyway, that's just my
take on it. :t2018:
Win 10 | Ableton Live 11 Suite | Reason 12 | i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz | 16 GB RAM | RME Babyface Pro | Akai MPC Live 2 & Akai Force | Roland System 8, MX1, TB3 | Dreadbox Typhon | Korg Minilogue XD