Show and Tell
-
@Frankbeat Dope! Thanks, mate!!!!
All my UI is posted - let me know if you can't find anything you might want.
-
@clevername27 Your welcome! I'm glad you like them.
In a few weeks, I'm planning to build a digital version of the KORG Minipops which I'm hoping to recreate those glamorous Sliders.
I also thought about replicating the original rhythm patterns. Maybe you can help me a bit with this. It's gotta be some artificial MIDI sequences (respecting DAW clock), each triggered by hitting a specific key. -
And here are some plastic switches (6-strip, but to avoid redundancy, only 2 shown here).
-
@Frankbeat Gorgeous—I love the drop shadows. Best wishes for the success of your instrument!
-
@Frankbeat Sure, I'll help as I can - let me know.
-
@Frankbeat Hi,
I was looking for some guidance.
When creating a virtual replica like this one, what considerations must be taken in regards to the likeness to the original product or company,
I've must have seen at least a dozen Model D replicas. I doubt they all have agreements with Moog.
Did you have to enter into a licensing agreement of any kind with the maker of the original gear?
Is it all good as long as you don't use the original brand name/logo?Are there any available resource on this subject.
thank you for sharing.
-
@RastaChess Of course, I can not give a reliable legal advice. But as far as I know:
A shape on its own is not subject to a copyright. For example: I must not use the original logo of Roland or even just its double stroke ‘R’ on my product. But there is no law saying, that I must not create my own ‘FB’ in a double stroke style like this. This goes on for the shape of a font, for example: The ‘TR-909’ print on the original machine by Roland is made of their own corporate font called ‘RBIO’. You must not use that font (presumed you would even have got hold of a copy of it which is unlikely) since it is property of Roland Music corp. But there's a guy that recreated this font and called it ‘PBIO’. It's shared on multiple websites. As far as I know, Behringer made use of it for their TR series replicas.
And for the UI widgets I shared here… Don't worry at all – they were created all by me. Though mostly based on macro zoom photos of gear, they are remodeled by me using basic geometric shapes, drawn as vectors and having some photoshop filters applied.
By the way: there is no Moog signature knob… My grandma had an old mobile heater with exactly the kind of knob you have on a genuine Model D
-
@Frankbeat Hi,
Thank you for your guidance. I suppose every individual case is different and the only way to obtain a definitive answer might be consulting a lawyer that specializes in intelectual property before proceeding.
Yesterday I asked the same question to my best buddy, Chat GPT.
I'm gonna post its answer here just for the sake of keeping the ball rolling.
let me know what you think.
"Creating a virtual instrument plugin that emulates a vintage synthesizer could potentially raise legal issues if you do not have the necessary permission to use the intellectual property (IP) associated with the original product. In particular, you may run into problems related to trademark law, copyright law, and patent law.
Trademark law: The name of the vintage synth, its logo, or other branding materials may be protected under trademark law. Therefore, you must be careful not to use any trademarked material without permission. You may want to consider changing the name of your virtual instrument to something that is not trademarked or seeking permission from the trademark owner to use their mark.
Copyright law: The original product's design, user interface, and other creative aspects may be protected under copyright law. Therefore, you must be careful not to copy any of these elements without permission. You may want to consider creating your own user interface that is different from the original or seeking permission from the copyright owner to use their work.
Patent law: If the original product has any patented technology, you may need to seek permission from the patent owner or obtain a license to use the technology.
In general, you should consult with a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property law to ensure that you are not infringing on any IP rights. It may be necessary to obtain permission or a license to use certain aspects of the vintage synth in your virtual instrument, and you should be prepared to pay for the use of the IP if required. Failing to obtain the necessary permission could result in legal action being taken against your company, which could be costly and damaging to your reputation."
-
This post is deleted! -
This article might be a good read on that matter: http://www.muzique.com/clones.htm
-
@Frankbeat Hi, thanks this is an interesting article.
Sorry for my friend's cut and dry approach. I don't mean to be rude.
See, I'm hoping to do something similar myself one day. That is the reason why I'm researching it.
I don't think the problem is related to schematics or circuitry at all. After all, what we are doing in software is well, ones and zeros and it's not analog. So as far as I am concern they are totally different things.
I think the weakness is in the design of the user interface. I can easily see a company claiming they own the design of the user interface, as some elements are indeed artistic in nature and the general composition of those elements can also be viewed as IP and as such can be copyright protected.
Something else to consider is that there is probably a statute of limitations for such copyright, you might be able to copy an 808 as its design is over 40 years old. But something more recent can be trickier.
Here is a different article I found on the subject.
https://www.tasanet.com/Knowledge-Center/Articles/ArtMID/477/ArticleID/913419/How-to-Protect-Your-User-Interface-Intellectual-PropertyThanks for your response.
-
@RastaChess You don’t need to be sorry… You ( and your buddy) were not offensive. It’s an interesting topic!
I don‘t think we have to distinguish between analog or digital processing. Yes, an 808 schematic is comparably old but that doesn’t mean, it’s unrelated to the issue we discuss. For a computational process, the same principle might apply: is the functionality you‘re about to copy really one that can be perceived special? For example: Is a instrument mixing a decaying sine tone with a single pulse to form something like a bass drum? Cool feature then, maybe. But how unique do you think this would be to a person who is deciding on granting patents for quite some years? I‘m only guessing though.
-
Well, I have to add as a side note: I‘m not the best person to have a valuable debate about these concerns because I don’t plan to sell plug-ins ever. My excitement ends at the point I can make my own plug-ins. I could blatantly replicate anything just the way I like (of course, limited by my abilities)
-
