Old 04-26-2018, 02:58 AM   #1
dookus
Human being with feelings
 
dookus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Tasmania Australia
Posts: 39
Default IP & IRs

I’ve been using a few IR’s lately and my mind wandered to thinking about who actually has a claim to actually ‘owning’ the IR. I see lot about ‘intellectual property’ in the news and in this digital age it rears it’s head frequently. So who does actually have a claim to owning an IR?or at least part of it (if anyone) If I take my favourite AC30 IR that I made myself and sold it would VOX have an interest in it? or the IR of a cave I made, would the owner of the cave be a potential stakeholder? particularly if the cave IR became the next big thing and was considered valuable ($)
dookus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2018, 04:09 AM   #2
sonicowl
Human being with feelings
 
sonicowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 739
Default

Sending guitar through AC30 IR will not sound the same as pluging guitar into real amp. IR contains just static (at fixed input level) filter and phase information, no distortion. Real amp/speaker combination is so much more than any IR.
I thinx VOX wouldn't care much if you make IR of their amp - all you really do is send a signal through their amp, and record it. How you process it afterwards (make IR of it) is your own freedom. By making IR out of AC30 you don't replicate AC30 in any way, you just mimic its frequency/phase response with digital filters.
And for cave, probably you will need permission from cave owner to record there. What you do with recording then is your thing. With IR you don't recreate the cave, it is just a simulation from one single point in cave to another, and often it is not close to real thing, especially if your IR's are not "true stereo". Acoustic spaces are much more than one single point to another, you move a little and it all changes, and IR's can't do that.


And don't worry, your recorded IR's will not become next big thing in value, market is full of IR's already - unless you plan to make software that is better than Altiverb or similar, then you may need to solve some licensing issues.
sonicowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2018, 08:43 AM   #3
dub tree
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 308
Default

Yeah, that would be like saying Vox has a claim on any music you recorded using their amp. Because that's what you've done: pass a signal through the amp and record it to use in your music.

As far as the cave, if I record myself talking at someone else's house, that doesn't mean they own the rights to what I just recorded. So I don't see how an IR would be different.
dub tree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2018, 09:47 AM   #4
Reason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 976
Default

IANAL etc.

Trademark might play into the Vox example. You don't have the rights to the Vox trademarks, whatever they might be, so marketing your IR as a "Vox AC30" could be problematic. But just like Vox has "70s British" and "80s British" modeling circuits on my Valvetronix amp, which are meant to indicate a Marshall emulation, I'd think you could refer to something that is associated with Vox. "Brown Diamond Combo" or something.

The actual IR, though, I agree with what everyone else is saying. They sold you the tool; they don't own what you make with the tool. This applies to Reaper, VSTs, Photoshop, actual hardware tools like hammers and circular saws, etc.

Another way to look at it would be, would you own a piece of the audio that someone else made using your IR? While your wallet might say yes, I think you'd agree that you don't.
Reason is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.