Is this the 'open' community that believes that ALL software should be free, or that ALL music, movies,
e-books etc., should be free? You know, the ones that are STEALING it and ruining the industries that produce that content?

This is unbelievable... that none of you can make the differentiation between sampling an ACOUSTIC instrument,
one of the most difficult processes in music, and sampling a sample... obviously, one of the easiest.
You are getting outraged at the wrong thing. No-one is saying it's any crime to go out and sample a violin, or a piano
or even a Rhodes. It's possibly a crime to market those as 'Fender Rhodes' or 'Steinway' without permission from the maker
(if he's still in business), but it's a long held accepted practice that sampling acoustic instruments (and out of
production synths, too) is legal. But it is NOT clear that you can sample for commercial use the samples contained
in a production, current keyboard. The operative word is 'commercial' use, and free distribution. In other words, yes
it's perfectly OK for you to sample a T3 for your own use ONLY, but it is illegal to distribute it. Just like a CD,
for instance. You can copy it legally for your own use, but you can't sell or share it.

But that some of you can't make the difference between sampling a Stradivarius and sampling an Audya
is baffling. It's the difference between writing a song, and someone copying that song... What's even more
disturbing is the complete lack of empathy (or guilt!) about your espoused theft of intellectual property. Can't
ANYONE put themselves in the position of someone who just spent a fortune making a TOTL soundset for
an arranger (you can't buy them at 'Samples-are-Us'!)
and someone says it's OK to copy your samples for free and distribute them to EVERYONE..?

Would you be happy if they did that? And if you wouldn't, you've answered your own question...

What amazes me is that James, who makes COMMERCIAL sample sets, isn't jumping in here and trying
to clear the issue up. Honestly, what you are saying is, it's OK to STEAL James' work... Just copy his data,
don't pay him a penny. Now, what do you think are the chances of him making another high quality set
for you to steal? Slim to none...

I am not saying it's wrong to sample a T3. All I am saying is it is illegal to distribute it. As is obvious from
your comments, the T2 set for the MS is so bad, it isn't a factor, but can you imagine Yamaha staying silent
should anyone do a GOOD job and clone their very expensively produced product to the point of indistinguishability..?
The samples that they MADE are theirs. Not yours, unless you buy their product, and then they are for your use only.

It's simple, when you think about it...

BTW, James CHOSE to make his string samples 'open'. But has he made his entire sample library 'open'?
The creator of a sample set MUST have the right to say whether they are 'open' or NOT. Or those that create
those great commercial sample sets will STOP making them. Does anyone REALLY want that?

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-06-2010).]