An update on copyright...

This forum is for discussing Rack Extensions. Devs are all welcome to show off their goods.
Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

selig wrote:
29 May 2018
Ostermilk wrote:
No you are right it isn't the ecosystem, it's the e-commerce system.

But it does serve to highlight the fact that I've come to expect excellent service from Devs (an exemplar being yourself) via the Prop Shop and I guess I've perhaps wrongly thought that some demonstrable form of effective vetting occurs that distinguishes the Prop Shop from an online auction site.
I see the shop as more like the Apple App Store. But in this case, unless NI complains, the Props can’t really do anything that I can think of. And I’m not expecting Andrew to step up and respond positively (like by proving refunds to all that ask), or anything similar.

It’s a depressing situation all around IMO, and at present I would think the ball is in NI’s court if we’re going to see any action.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Indeed.

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

QVprod wrote:
29 May 2018
Ostermilk wrote:
29 May 2018

See, this is the thing, I DID stay on topic...
Let's not make a mess of this current thread. Your posts in the previous thread weren't the only ones that were deleted, in fact it was several users all for the sake of attempting to keep things civil (for better or for worse). We ourselves did not demonize any user. Now, that aside let's please follow the moderation request that has already been made for this thread.
Kenni wrote:
29 May 2018
Dear ReasonTalkers,

Please refrain from discussing what went on in other threads, and/or link to other threads that are not related.

Stay on topic.
Was there even a need for this post?

Give us a chance to shut up at least... :mrgreen:

User avatar
Exowildebeest
Posts: 1553
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

The mods could take a cue from Props and not delete any posts unless anyone complains by handwritten letter... ;)

(this post is a joke)

User avatar
bxbrkrz
Posts: 3810
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

Welp, regarding the Props' statement.
They just need to blacklist that individual for life, and share their decision with their other partners so they too don't fall into the same trap.
It's naive to believe that individual won't come back with a new face. The Props, and us, need to stay vigilant.
757365206C6F67696320746F207365656B20616E73776572732075736520726561736F6E20746F2066696E6420776973646F6D20676574206F7574206F6620796F757220636F6D666F7274207A6F6E65206F7220796F757220696E737069726174696F6E2077696C6C206372797374616C6C697A6520666F7265766572

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

bxbrkrz wrote:
29 May 2018
Welp, regarding the Props' statement.
They just need to blacklist that individual for life, and share their decision with their other partners so they too don't fall into the same trap.
It's naive to believe that individual won't come back with a new face. The Props, and us, need to stay vigilant.
The point is, put loosely, is that no injured party has made a complaint about any copyright infringing product currently in the store, so nobody is going to be blacklisted or otherwise sanctioned in any way, as things stand.

The basis for any allegations so far only exist in this unlisted video, posted earlier on this board, which I'm linking to for context here.


User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

29 May 2018

Ostermilk wrote:
29 May 2018
The point is, put loosely, is that no injured party has made a complaint about any copyright infringing product currently in the store, so nobody is going to be blacklisted or otherwise sanctioned in any way, as things stand.
I can hardly believe that Andrew would ever be welcome back into the Prop Store, and if so (for whatever reasons) he would be throughly scrutinized. But it would be far easier for them to simply deny him the opportunity, especially if they want their customers to have any faith in future products!

So I expect he is already "blacklisted" on some level, but I cannot imagine how they would approach any type of sanctioning in this particular case.
Selig Audio, LLC

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

Ostermilk wrote:
29 May 2018
The point is, put loosely, is that no injured party has made a complaint about any copyright infringing product currently in the store, so nobody is going to be blacklisted or otherwise sanctioned in any way, as things stand.
I wonder if anyone has already snitched to Native Instruments? (EDIT: No, I have not! ;) )

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

selig wrote:
29 May 2018
Ostermilk wrote:
29 May 2018
The point is, put loosely, is that no injured party has made a complaint about any copyright infringing product currently in the store, so nobody is going to be blacklisted or otherwise sanctioned in any way, as things stand.
I can hardly believe that Andrew would ever be welcome back into the Prop Store, and if so (for whatever reasons) he would be throughly scrutinized. But it would be far easier for them to simply deny him the opportunity, especially if they want their customers to have any faith in future products!

So I expect he is already "blacklisted" on some level, but I cannot imagine how they would approach any type of sanctioning in this particular case.
That's exactly how I'm 'feeling' it too.

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

madmacman wrote:
29 May 2018
Ostermilk wrote:
29 May 2018
The point is, put loosely, is that no injured party has made a complaint about any copyright infringing product currently in the store, so nobody is going to be blacklisted or otherwise sanctioned in any way, as things stand.
I wonder if anyone has already snitched to Native Instruments? (EDIT: No, I have not! ;) )
It's not a case of 'snitching', anyone that owns any of the products withdrawn from the store is likely to have doubts about themselves unwittingly using someone else's samples in their productions.

It would be wise to check with the copyright holder.

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3931
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

madmacman wrote:
29 May 2018
I wonder if anyone has already snitched to Native Instruments? (EDIT: No, I have not! ;) )
Snitches get glitches :ugeek:

scratchnsnifff
Posts: 1423
Joined: 21 Sep 2016

29 May 2018

avasopht wrote:
29 May 2018
madmacman wrote:
29 May 2018
I wonder if anyone has already snitched to Native Instruments? (EDIT: No, I have not! ;) )
Snitches get glitches :ugeek:
You won the internet

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mayor of plucktown :evil:

User avatar
nickb523
RE Developer
Posts: 427
Joined: 23 Jan 2017
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:

29 May 2018

I don't know what to say. But I think this sums it up -



:(

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

selig wrote:
29 May 2018
But in this case, unless NI complains, the Props can’t really do anything that I can think of.
Thats true but the fact remains that NI _HAS TO_ claim their copyright or else they set a precedence for others copying their samples (at least in the US afaik).

User avatar
sonicbyte
Posts: 347
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Argentina
Contact:

29 May 2018

Here is another video I found in another site, it's from a spanish guy who feel cheated by softphonics products, pointing out horrific sample issues in 2 products purchased, null support and warning other users to stay away from softphonics products.
In the video he also question the origin of their samples, he even thought that could be grabbed from some free public source bank in the internet... I wish I saw this video some months ago before purchase myself some of their products....what I found most disturbing for me is the lack of quality control by the props to what they sale in the shop, I mean all samples shown in the first part are clicking at the end!! Anyway here is the video in case you're interested




Found on this post https://www.hispasonic.com/noticias/sof ... ples/43747

User avatar
Exowildebeest
Posts: 1553
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

normen wrote:
29 May 2018
selig wrote:
29 May 2018
But in this case, unless NI complains, the Props can’t really do anything that I can think of.
Thats true but the fact remains that NI _HAS TO_ claim their copyright or else they set a precedence for others copying their samples (at least in the US afaik).
I don't think it works that way...

Luckily for Softphonics, there's a small chance that nobody tells NI and/or NI don't feel like it's financially worth persuing a damages claim or whatever punishment in civil court, and they'll just send an angry letter. And Softphonics has already ceased and desisted - and he might actually be committed to a psych ward. Good luck sueing such an individual - all kinds of legal protections and complications could come into play if he's declared mentally unfit [strike]to be president[/strike] to be held accountable at this time.

Then again, NI is German... Those fellows are usually pretty thorough in playing things by the books, so I heard :redface:

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 May 2018

Exowildebeest wrote:
29 May 2018
normen wrote:
29 May 2018


Thats true but the fact remains that NI _HAS TO_ claim their copyright or else they set a precedence for others copying their samples (at least in the US afaik).
I don't think it works that way...
Hm yeah, might be I mix up trademarks and copyright there.

User avatar
fieldframe
RE Developer
Posts: 1037
Joined: 19 Apr 2016

30 May 2018

normen wrote:
29 May 2018
Exowildebeest wrote:
29 May 2018


I don't think it works that way...
Hm yeah, might be I mix up trademarks and copyright there.
That's correct. Trademark suits in the US can be thrown out if the defendant can prove that the plaintiff didn't defend their name / logo / trade dress previously, but copyright has no such provision.

It would only make sense for NI to pursue litigation in this case if they had a reasonable expectation of recouping enough in compensatory or statutory damages to justify the cost of litigating. And that... could be tough to call.

RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

30 May 2018

Innocent until proven guilty.

Softphonics clearly denied* (EDIT: to me it seems clear at least - but to say the least it's not approved) the allegations at the same time of closing down.
Propellerhead Software remained neutral.
Alleged product removal other than by Softphonics was denied, too.

Apparently Native Instruments' statement is missing now, approving or denying whether the alleged copyrighted contents' usage was rightful.

Should the allegations win, Andrew Skelton most likely can't be held responsible; and all probably wasn't his fault or intention.

EDIT:
*"1. The constant manipulated bad press over some recent beta tests, attacks and smearing older reason refills has been the final nail." Quoted from http://www.softphonics.com
Last edited by RobC on 30 May 2018, edited 1 time in total.

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

30 May 2018

RobC wrote:
30 May 2018
Innocent until proven guilty.
I don't think people are seeking to apportion blame, I know I'm certainly not.

I'm mostly interested in what happens in these circumstance when people have purchased stuff from the shop they can no longer use through no fault of their own.

For me I lost the price of a nice Fish and Chip supper with the Mrs, i.e. I'm not that bothered (but she's furious...:),

User avatar
MrFigg
Competition Winner
Posts: 9123
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

30 May 2018

Ostermilk wrote:
30 May 2018
RobC wrote:
30 May 2018
Innocent until proven guilty.
I don't think people are seeking to apportion blame, I know I'm certainly not.

I'm mostly interested in what happens in these circumstance when people have purchased stuff from the shop they can no longer use through no fault of their own.

For me I lost the price of a nice Fish and Chip supper with the Mrs, i.e. I'm not that bothered (but she's furious...:),
Always go with the fish supper man. Always. I’m stuck here in Sweden without and I’d trade you half my REs for one right now. If only Props would let me :):):).
🗲 2ॐ ᛉ

User avatar
16BitBear
Posts: 247
Joined: 21 May 2016
Location: Arizona

30 May 2018

RobC wrote:
30 May 2018
Innocent until proven guilty.

Softphonics clearly denied the allegations at the same time of closing down.
Propellerhead Software remained neutral.
Alleged product removal other than by Softphonics was denied, too.

Apparently Native Instruments' statement is missing now, approving or denying whether the alleged copyrighted contents' usage was rightful.

Should the allegations win, Andrew Skelton most likely can't be held responsible; and all probably wasn't his fault or intention.
I am curious why you are so dead set on defending an indefensible act. Copyright infringement on this scale is criminal. It does not matter if he denies the allegations or not. I have contacted NI about this as I bought one Refill and realized there were issues early on. I didn't have the libraries to compare it to but others have, hence the videos.

How could he not possibly be held responsible? Because he is 'autistic'? That does not absolve him of fault or intent. Propellerheads statement clearly shows that this is ongoing and it remains to be seen what happens next. Anyone who purchased the Refills and RE's should be very aware of this situation if they intend to use them. I certainly would not.

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

30 May 2018

DJBuddhaBear wrote:
30 May 2018
I am curious why you are so dead set on defending an indefensible act.
He's defending due process.

RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

30 May 2018

I neutrally stated facts.

Let's not forget if allegations turn out to be wrong, then mass defamation happened, which can result things to turn criminal for the accusers in as much as a flip of a coin.

Once Native Instruments makes a statement, we'll see the outcome.

From the looks of it, all that can be done for Andrew, is lighting a candle and pray.

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3931
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

30 May 2018

RobC wrote:
30 May 2018
Innocent until proven guilty.

Softphonics clearly denied the allegations at the same time of closing down.
Propellerhead Software remained neutral.
Alleged product removal other than by Softphonics was denied, too.
I hear you.

But where exactly has Andrew claimed the samples were licensed? Because his only mention of the samples was when he claimed to have recorded them himself so I'm all ears. This is highly suspicious and unless supported by evidence at this point his innocence in that realm of unrealistic wishful thinking.
RobC wrote:
30 May 2018
Apparently Native Instruments' statement is missing now, approving or denying whether the alleged copyrighted contents' usage was rightful.

Should the allegations win, Andrew Skelton most likely can't be held responsible; and all probably wasn't his fault or intention.
They likely completely unaware of this. Given it took this long to discover the link, unless they've been explicitly informed I wouldn't expect them to respond, especially now the products aren't even in the store.

---

All in all this is such a tricky one, and I just hope his customers don't end up losing out in this, or that it in any way harms the shop.
Last edited by avasopht on 30 May 2018, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 May 2018

RobC wrote:I neutrally stated facts.

Let's not forget if allegations turn out to be wrong, then mass defamation happened, which can result things to turn criminal for the accusers in as much as a flip of a coin.

Once Native Instruments makes a statement, we'll see the outcome.

From the looks of it, all that can be done for Andrew, is lighting a candle and pray.
I think a good lawyer may also be helpful if NI decides to prosecute…

The allegations are that these samples come from NI, and that HAS been proven.

Another fact is that Andrew lied about the source of at least some of these samples, describing the recording process for the string samples (which he did not record).

There is nothing criminal about stating facts, and in these threads we are asking everyone stick to the known facts.

You mentioned previously that Softphonics somehow denied these samples were from NI - I never saw that on their site, can you clarify so we can be sure we’re discussing only known facts here?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

Locked
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], parma and 21 guests