Is it legal to sample Moog Synth and sell it?

[brento]

Hi there,

I have a Moog Sub Phatty and want to release a CD full of bass samples and bass loops. I have a couple of questions regarding this, and am hoping the forum members, and perhaps someone from Moog, can help me get this cleared up.

1) Am I allowed to sample a Moog synthesizer, and then sell the recordings as a 'sample pack' CD?
2) Am I allowed to say on the album that the synthesizer which was sampled was a "Moog Sub Phatty" or am I infringing on the moog name?

Thanks in advance for anyone who can answer my questions.

[MC]

Hi there,

I have a Moog Sub Phatty and want to release a CD full of bass samples and bass loops. I have a couple of questions regarding this, and am hoping the forum members, and perhaps someone from Moog, can help me get this cleared up.

1) Am I allowed to sample a Moog synthesizer, and then sell the recordings as a 'sample pack' CD?
2) Am I allowed to say on the album that the synthesizer which was sampled was a "Moog Sub Phatty" or am I infringing on the moog name?

Thanks in advance for anyone who can answer my questions.

1) yes as long as the sample is not from a copyrighted source (and they WILL find you)
2) no, you must have permission to use either 'moog' or 'sub phatty' because they are both trademarked

[robml]

as long as you create the sounds it is fine.

you cant use trademarked names without permission. you certainly want to avoid implying in any way it is an official moog product.

you might get away with "sample library created with a Moog Sub Phatty" but not "Moog Sub Phatty Sample Library". get it?

cheers

[stiiiiiiive]

Are you guys saying that any album where I can read:

John De La Stuff: piano, Moog synthesizers, celesta, backing vocals

...is either authorized by Moog either infringing copyright laws?

[thealien666]

Yes Stiiiiiiive.

The minute the brand is mentioned by an artist that receives money or royalties for his or her work it has to be approved by said brand.

That's why on many records, you'll see "synthesizers" mentioned but not by name, because the artist didn't get permission, or didn't want to pay, for specific brand names.

That doesn't apply for non profit music and artists.

It's the commercial aspect of it that causes problems.

Sometimes, when an artist becomes popular, it will be the opposite; companies will sponsor him or her on the condition that the brand name of the company is mentionned and clearly visible during live shows.

Marketing and brand names are a big business !

[Kenneth]

I have always mentioned my instruments by make and model in my album notes. Never had any problems. I really don't think it's an issue. Most companies I'm sure would be happy for the free advertising.

[robml]

Are you guys saying that any album where I can read:

John De La Stuff: piano, Moog synthesizers, celesta, backing vocals

...is either authorized by Moog either infringing copyright laws?

no thats not what we are saying.

there is a marked difference between
1. making a "musical product" (sample cd) and selling those sounds for someone else USE in their productions, and
2. making a "musical work" (dodgy synth rock album) for people to LISTEN to.

you can write a list of instruments used on your bands "musical work" (dodgy synth rock album) without any issues.

as i said, if you make a sample library that could be perceived to be a moog product then you want to make it clear that it is not a moog product.

cheers

[Bald Eagle]

I wonder if the laws depend on the source of the samples. If you sample a piano from a digital workstation then you are basically making a copy of someone else's sampled recording which is probably copyrighted and should clearly be a violation. But if you sample a piano directly then is that still a violation? Can an original analog/acoustic sound be copyrighted? If they are covered by copyrights then you can't sample guitars, flutes or car horns.

One possible scenario comes to mind with the Korg Kronos. It features samples from a "Japanese Grand Piano" but never one mention of Yamaha but most assume that's who's piano it is.

Another thing to consider is whether or not a sampled library will take away business from Moog. Legal or not they will likely not care if it doesn't hurt them financially or damage their reputation. There are a lot of sample libraries and apps out there that do mention company and brand names and no one seems to care too much. But if you are planning on getting rich from the sample libraries you should chat with their legal department first.

[unfiltered37]

These kinds of things are very much in the "grey area". It all comes down to whether it is worth it to sue, and since it can be a complicated issue, very much up to the judge and the lawyers. This kind of law is still being formed. I know its not the same thing, but look at Marvin Gaye's family suing Robin Thicke for a song with basically the same chord changes and structure as "Got to give it up". How does the judge decide this? All he can do is basically listen to it, because a judge or jury probably won't know the technical aspects of the music. I think he ended up settling, which is probably smart because a jury would listen to "blurred lines" and know it is a ripoff.

So I doubt anyone will sue you for saying you used a Moog synth by name on an album. But if you were to make a lot of money (like at least 5 figures) selling samples, you could get sued for using the Moog name.

[EricK]

I'd operate under the premise that you would be sued faster than you can burn your disc.

At the very least, program your own sounds, and sell them as "analog synthesizer" samples. Stay away from any trademarked names.

For example, some workstations have Rhodes and Wurlitzer emulations or samples. They are called "Tine" and "Reed" pianos respectively "or even "Whirly."


The best advice here is "Consult your attorney."

[thealien666]

Yes, when in doubt, simply abstain from using trade names.

Even on my Alesis Ion, the emulated filter names are things like: mg 4-pole, rp 4-poles, ob 2-pole, tb 3-pole, jp 4-pole. For (Moog, Arp, Oberheim, Roland TB303, Roland jupiter). And these are only software emulations. However, the preset patches, some of which were programmed by Brian Kehew and Erik Norlander, do wear names like "TaurusBassPdls" and "StixMinimogue".

[robml]

it is a grey area. there are heaps of precedents, which if you follow, you can skate close to the edge. i've outlined the hard and fast rules, but as said by someone else, consult your attorney.

there are plenty of good moog librarys out there already. i used the Loopmasters Moog Taurus MK.1 Bass Expander before i had a minitaur. if you look at their disclaimer with the product it says nothing about it being licensed, and i doubt it is. its all good promotion for moog really- expanding on the legacy and extending the desire for musicians to want moog products.

some people are not keen for it though. it does depend on the company.

when waves did the V-series plugs based on the neve eq's and comp, the GUI was originally designed with NEVE knobs on it. it looked really good (ive still got a copy somewhere). but neve were not happy, as they had licensed the "likeness" and the "name" to universal audio who did a similar emulation. subsequently waves had to come up with their own gui. recently waves did the 73 eq again, and if you look closely they have tried to make it as close as they could to neve likeness, without being a direct copy- they also never mention the word NEVE in the description- but clearly state its based on the 1073. that's skating close to the edge for you

cheers

[PHC]

I have a similar question, but concerning preset banks.
If I make 100 presets from scratch and sell them as a" Sound bank for Moog Little Phatty" is there a problem with that?
There are a tones of sites (some very professional) that sell sound banks for both hardware and software synthesizers, mentioning their names (how could they not, You wouldn't know which instrument they are for , if I make a sound bank and sell it to the store and they pay me % royalties when they sell it, is it ok?

Personally I think there shouldn't be a problem, because the presets are my work, the synth is just a tool and nothing forbids messing with the presets (maybe there would be a problem if I wrote a new LP OS, but presets?)

[MC]

Samples can be used in sampling devices (software or hardware) however the quality of the sample is questionable depending on the recording techniques and quality of the sampling hardware which may compromise the actual sound of the original.

On the other hand, sound banks can only be used on the instrument upon which they were created thus you're always hearing the original. MIDI sysex sound banks are not interchangeable between models of the same manufacturer so you HAVE to label the make and model when you advertise the sound bank.

For decades there have been classifieds in magazines such as Keyboard, SOS, et al advertising sound banks for Yamaha DX7, Roland D50, Emu Emulator II, et al and I do not recall any trademark ligitation involving those cases. I never saw an ad that read sound bank for an analog synthesizer built in Asheville NC that begins with "V" and ends with "R"

Sound banks for a Phatty can increase sales of Phatty(s), but seldom true for samples ("I have sampled Phatty sounds, why should I buy a Phatty?")