Copyright rules question

[JayPro]

Don't worry...I'm not about to make any derivative work of a SS product and call it exclusively mine anytime soon.

But as a config author of many effects I created starting like a decade plus ago or so, I have to ask this.

Can I show a G-force display in action to a company of less than 100 people and tell them, "This is my config." or "This is a GF config that uses code I wrote/adapted."?

I realize that whatever I or any other config author submits becomes SS property without compensation, and that such ones receive credit by name in the effect title. But still, can I describe it as "mine". Maybe as long as it isn't publically declared as such?

I hope I asked clearly, as I have zero expertise in these matters aside from trying to wrap my brain around a long-winded EULA.

[JayPro]

Yes; but I'm not thinking about putting up a site to showcase whatever new stuff I might (read: will) consider doing in future.

I'm just supposing if someone or an audience of less than 100 (because that's the cutoff number for non-public exhibitions) looks at a "scene" displaying one or more effects authored by me, asks me about it, and I say something like "It's my config/code or my spin on someone else's with due credit given." I'm wondering if just saying that sort of thing is violative in any manner of my end of the EULA (End User License Agreement FYI).

I appreciate your answer; although it kind of bypassed my point.

PS: I would think that had SoundSpectrum not become the corporate entity is it now, defunct sites like yours wouldn't have been taken down by official request/cease and desist order/whatever it's called.

Believe me; I recall when this whole groundbreaking venture started out as a single humble, white-backgrounded webpage offering downloads of the embryonic GF and WC apps, i.e. the "mothership" products of the current company. From that came a few "satellite" sites put up by config makers who offered their contributions freely and without fear of reprisal.

Obviously, this was before the corporate aspect became a factor. And there was also the notion that well before the current business model started taking shape, there had to have been some kind of unspoken, unofficial partnership of sorts by all involved to share resources and ideas.

That latter understanding certainly must have helped pave the way to an easy/easier transition from private enterprise to public success story.

[BTT]

Hello JayPro

Below is a brief description of the different licensing options for Aeon, G-Force, SoftSkies, and WhiteCap. Please note that all use of our software products is governed by the End User License Agreement and is restricted to non-commercial, personal use only. Any public or commercial use or display of Aeon, G-Force, SoftSkies, or WhiteCap is strictly prohibited without written permission from SoundSpectrum, Inc. If you suspect that our software products are being used illegally or improperly, we ask that you please report it to us immediately.

End User Licence Agreement:-

https://www.soundspectrum.com/legal/eula.html

Source SoundSpectrum Inc

---------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright laws as I understand them:-

If you have submitted configs to SoundSpectrum, and they are included as part of any of their programs then they become the property of SoundSpectrum Inc. However, if you have created configs that have not been submitted or used by SoundSpectrum then the configs remain the intellectual property of the author. If you only use your own configs you can only use them with a SoundSpectrum program to display them, so you would be in breach of copyright.

As stated:- ...and is restricted to non-commercial, personal use only...

My best advice to you JayPro is to contact Brandon at SoundSpectrum, explain exactly what you want to do, and obtain written permission from SoundSpectrum.

https://www.soundspectrum.com/support/contact.html

[Rovastar]

Not been to this forum for years (or used Gforce for years really) but this was curious about what happened with G-force/soundspectrum/55ware/etc

This thread prompted me to respond however especially by this:

"If you have submitted configs to SoundSpectrum, and they are included as part of any of their programs then they become the property of SoundSpectrum Inc. However, if you have created configs that have not been submitted or used by SoundSpectrum then the configs remain the intellectual property of the author. If you only use your own configs you can only use them with a SoundSpectrum program to display them, so you would be in breach of copyright. "

I consider you completely wrong here.

Submitted configs are not soley property of SoundSpectrum.
I have never signed over my rights to my configs to Andy.

I gave permission for him to use and distribute them. There is a difference.
In theory, I can withdraw my permission at any time.

I used the ideas and concepts in other visualizations over the years and I've used other config authors stuff too with permission (asking nicely goes a long way)

The militant approach used to get configs from some (no idea of your case DanPin, it sounds harsh) I disliked and I hoped that this attitude would have changed over the past decade. Sadly G-Force lost what I consider the best flowfield producer out there Roger Bigot because of this and made me less likely to contribute too tbh.

Even being out of the game for many years now but writing a G-force/Geiss type emulator is trivial (to pretend otherwise is foolish). Flowfields and waveforms concepts have been used many times before and after G-Force was first released.

One day I want to do some visualization stuff again and I will likely open source it all now. And frankly threads like this just make it more motivated to make a G-Force like clone.

/waves Hi, JayPro you should ask permission to show G-Force that is correct but it would be downright offensive if they refused for your use case.

[BTT]

Hello Rovastar

This is section three of the licence conditions you agree to when installing SoundSpectrum products.

3. Ownership. The foregoing license gives You limited license to use the Software.

Licensor and/or it's affiliates or assignees own and retain all right, title and interest, including all copyright and intellectual property rights, in and to, the Software, any related documentation (including design, sytems and user), and any visual output or video export of the Software and all copies thereof. All rights not specifically granted in this EULA, including Federal and International Copyrights, are reserved by Licensor. All user-contributed Software configuration files (being files in a text-based language that the Software is designed to interpret, hereafter being referred to as the "Configs" are considered the sole ownership of Licensor upon submission to the Licensor for inclusion into the Software. By submitting Configs, You become a "Contributor" and are agreeing to their ownership and use by Licensor, including unlimited distribution and/or licensing (as part of the Software) without permission or compensation. Any Configs submitted to Licensor (by email or other form) will be considered a "work made for hire" under the United States Copyright Act.

[andy55]

There are many cross-connected issues at hand in this discussion...

Let's first take a look at the nature of deterministic iterative computing and animation. Which is to say that, at first glance, a copyright on the animation of a mathematical iteration (e.g. a fractal) seems tenuous. Otherwise, make sure that you don't forget to send this month's check to the Mandelbrot estate. Or perhaps similarly, don't forget to pay your yearly human genome patent license fees. Yet, the artistic animation of mathematical expressions don't form out of thin air either. Alas, quality digital animation fundamentally requires the engineering and maintenance of a capable and stable engine as well as the content itself. They're as interlocked as time and space. To me, these observations reflect that no single person or company singularly authors anything anymore -- we are in true digital community together.

Having sweat over the SoundSpectrum codebase for approaching 20 years now, I wouldn't describe the code that makes it all happen as "trivial." To anyone who disagrees, how about that person authors a commercial-grade, realtime, multi-platform, UI-supported, documented, visualization engine and I'll spend a few weekends writing some scenes for it. This is only to say that there is a difference from the tens of thousands of hours invested into a capable and mature codebase than from the dozens (or hundreds at most) some config authors have put in crafting their content. Further, the moderators and contributors of this forum have spent more time supporting and fostering community around this art than any 3rd party config author ever has. Community members' efforts may not be directly in the product itself, but these community members have demonstrated their care and support for this art more than the contributors that have since gone on their way many years ago.

The new "new" is community. In any community, the commitment of members can be measured in different ways. One determinant on who is entitled to what can be described by how many hours have been invested into various parts of the total experience, crossed by the requisite aptitude of said efforts. If anyone would like to step up and offer senior/pro dev man-months, then I'd take them up on it. If anyone would like to contribute materially to SoundSpectrum's expenses so that Brandon and I could receive market-level wages or get a real office to work out of, then I'd take them up on it. Until then (or until people get what Tunr really is about -- an open platform for supporting visual art), we all must fight for the survival of this art, and it takes all of us to do it.

SoundSpectrum, content contributors, and community supporters ultimately are fostering amazing art that is larger than any one person or mind. That's a great thing, and we should celebrate that! So much in this world now revolves around material consumption (filling landfills), and I'm proud this community wants MORE out of our life experience.

Into the future, Brandon and I want to steer our efforts into a space that won't become a dead end, thanks to platform and API practices of large "modern" tech companies such as Apple, Google, and Microsoft. We are specifically exploring ideas and visualization concepts that use next-generation public technologies, such as blockchain and IPFS. We have debated to do a crowd-funded campaign but it's hard to reach people these days as there's so much noise out there. If anyone can contribute towards such goals (or can connect us with someone), then we'd be happy to meet with you. Tomorrow's engine has to be two steps ahead and is more than just than its content,