Following on from another thread

Question:

Would you be prepared to pay for professionally designed styles knowing that you would only be able to use them on your own keyboard? (Protected)

Or do you believe that once you have bought them, then you should be able to do with them whatever you want, (Unprotected) including giving them away.

It will be interesting to see the results

Bill

I would not mind protected as long as you have lifetime replacement of the USB, talking from experience you don't pay for the media but the styles and sounds that were created, the protection, which preoct from piracy does not benefit the buyer once the media goes bad,then you can throw away in the garbage which I have already done.

I would not mind protected as long as you have lifetime replacement of the USB, talking from experience you don't pay for the media but the styles and sounds that were created, the protection, which preoct from piracy does not benefit the buyer once the media goes bad,then you can throw away in the garbage which I have already done.

I don't think that because someone has an opinion different from yours that that makes them 'stupid'. Else, why have a poll? Instead of "Protected" or "Unprotected", we could just label it "Brilliant" or "Stupid". JMO.

chas

Here we go again........it was so nice & peaceful on SZ...oh well

The idea that protected styles will bring costs down may not be true. It costs software makers more to write protected files, and to the need to update those protected files from hackers who have figured it out.

That's an interesting point about editing/modifying styles, Ian.

In legal terms, I wonder at what point is an edited/modified style regarded as not being the original work. I suppose it could be argued that changing even one note or beat might be deemed enough to render the edited/modified style different enough as to not infringe any copyright restrictions.

Fascinatin' ain't it? Any copyright/intellectual property lawyers on here?

Fascinatin' ain't it? Any copyright/intellectual property lawyers on here?

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Diki,

Frankly, I tend to agree with Tony Hughes - I don't think it matters one damn one way or the other.
chas

One's opinion about this issue MIGHT be different if any of you worked in a profession where copyright infringement and piracy made any difference at all to YOUR income.

And that, I hate to say, is a sad, sad thing. Has it got to the point where something is wrong ONLY if it affects us personally, or are we capable of deciding if something is wrong purely by the ethics of it?

As I tried to point out... styles are not made by greedy corporations. Styles are made by MUSICIANS. You know, just like you and me. Well, maybe not QUITE like you and me,

because I don't think I ever heard a user style by anyone from this forum that compared to a good ROM style, but who knows..? Maybe if there WERE money to be made from it, it might be actually worth our time to make one that good.

But I guess we'll never know, because most of you seem to think that, as long as it's not YOUR time and effort that is being ripped off, it's perfectly fine to do it for others. Other musicians, at that.

All I am saying is that while the practice may be commonplace, there really isn't any argument that makes it RIGHT. I can't even say that I haven't used a style or an SMF that might be 3rd party. One never knows, today, as many are floating out there. But, even if I HAVE got some, I won't say it is RIGHT to do so. I can say that I am doing a bad thing. Can you?

Or do you need to ignore the thought that a MUSICIAN made these styles, and pretend it is some greedy corporation?

BTW, things got pretty quiet round here AFTER I stopped posting. And, in all honesty, I only started back when Yamaha came here to directly question us about what we would like to see in a new arranger. The opportunity to directly address the manufacturers (or their representatives) is rare, and I couldn't resist the opportunity. This thread came as a spinoff from a suggestion to Yamaha's threads I made about protected style files. I honestly feel that I could care LESS about hardware features of arrangers (despite having quite a few ideas!) compared to their CONTENT.

I would be perfectly happy with the arranger I have got for the rest of my LIFE (and I honestly think most of you would too) if there were a constant stream of new, high quality styles for it, at a reasonable price. But sadly, the short-sighted and to be quite frank ethically questionable attitudes shown on this thread pretty much guarantee that we are doomed to paying thousands simply to get a few new styles wrapped in a case with only a few more hardware features.

So.... this attitude not only costs OTHER musicians their income from making styles, but costs US a fair chunk of our income from paying through the nose for a new arranger basically for the new styles in it. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

There was a reason I stayed away from here for a long time, and this thread (nice to see the usual back-stabbing comments from people with nothing else to say) has only reinforced the correctness of the decision.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.