Licensing confusion

[Paul Battersby]

(07-13-2016, 01:07 AM)bigcat1969 Wrote: The one that bugs me is the Philharmonia Orchestral samples. They use a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, but add a restriction that they can't be used to make a sampler instrument. This completely contradicts  the rules of the CC license they are using.

A thought recently occurred to me. The part of the license in question reads:

Quote:... they must not be sold or made available 'as is' (i.e. as samples or as a sampler instrument)

A sampler instrument is defined by Wikipedia as:

Quote:A sampler is an electronic musical instrument similar in some respects to a synthesizer, but instead of generating sounds, it uses recordings (or "samples") of sounds that are loaded or recorded into it by the user

.wav files, and an .sfz file don't seem to me to qualify as an electronic musical instrument. An sfz file is just a text file. In no way is that an instrument. It isn't even a virtual instrument (or software sampler). If the files are converted from .mp3 to .wav (or processed in any other way - like adding eq, editing the samples), then they are not being distributed "as is" and they are not being given away as samples. They are being given away as part of a package. Samples + an sfz file.

Seems to me, we should be free to use them as part of a sound font.