And even without trackers, anyone can record WAV or MP3 files of any chiptune & plagiarize it regardless.
But that is plagarism without doubt, record a tune Exactly and re use it is what Timbaland did, and Janne Sunni reached a settlement with the lawyers. But, if Timbaland were changed a note, or changedd some chords, then the lawyers have had a very difficult path.
The definition of plagiarism is very strict.
TechEmporium wrote:
A. The whole chiptune & NES scene was founded on piracy
Excuse me, you are justifying melodies thieves?. Also, the Internet was founded on militarism, and we are not dropping bombs there.
It has nothing to do.
TechEmporium wrote:
B. A plethora of devices & applications are founded on the need to save & copy information (such as optical disk drives, optical disk recording software & even audio/video tape recorders). You can't just do like Nintendo & tell companies like Panasonic & Nero that their products are illegal because they can be used for illegal deeds (especially when there's no legislation against it). Imagine if Nintendo & the ESA sued Panasonic & Nero for producing DVD burners & burning software; wouldn't that be ridiculous? Just because a DVD drive & recording software can be used to copy a GameCube disk/ISO, it doesn't make either product illegal; only the act of copying a game you're licensed to use for a purpose other than an own, personal backup is illegal.
WTH?. This has nothing to do here.
TechEmporium wrote:
C. The fact remains that there's no such thing as 100% security on any computer system of any kind
So?, I think that you don't understand my point. I'm NOT saying that we need to make more "secure" the NES format, I'm saying that we must not leave it easier for thieves.
I know that do reverse engineering is always possible on a chiptune, but it's a difficult task, however, have a reverse engineering tool makes all the thief-stuff very simple.
TechEmporium wrote:
Now, if there were some kind of a programming library to embed NSFs into EXEs that works like uFMOD, then you can create a PE executable with the NSF & pack it. That means the determined hacker will have to contend with decompressing/unscrambling obfuscated code before he can reverse it; that still doesn't mean that the compressed executable is unbreakable (the hacker can just reverse the PE executable packer's compression algorithm & create an unpacker).
So?, I will win the trial if I can show that the song is mine, because it is completely my song. But the tings are very different if they can change the internal data of a chiptune. The judges are binaries, if they detect a subtle difference, it is not plagiarism. If you don't believe me, check the Coldplay's plagiarism with "Viva La Vida" and Joe Satriani's "If I Could Fly"; the judges have said "no" because there are small differences, but it is clear plagiarism.
Finally, it is not hard to understand my point, you can agree with me, or disagree, but trying to explain me what the "piracy" is, or how the NES chipmusic have founded, is a demonstration that was not understood my point.
I will leave this here, because we will continue discussing about this until the end of time. xD
What I think is just right there, if you disagree, no problem, if you agree, no problem too. I think that you're trying to change my opinion, but I always will think that this reverse engineering software provides new tools to thieves.
Copyright for music has always been a very shaky business.
Stealing other people's instrumentation techniques has always been perfectly legal. Whether or not this is moral is up to you, but if you could have prevented it centuries of progress in classical music would have been undone. Fortunately, the music largely had to be transmitted in the "source" format at the time, revealing all its secrets to the astute reader.
Stealing a recording or a melody/harmony directly has been less legal, though there are tons of loopholes here, which Dalek has pointed out some of.
On the plus side, even though it is now easier than ever to steal, it is also easier than ever to assert your identity. The best protection you've got is to make yourself known, build a reputation so that you can be found when somebody steals your stuff.
If someone with less reputation steals from you, it's not really much of a problem; either their impact is minimal and you never find out, or you do and they get publically shamed. Or maybe you just get mad, and nobody makes any money anyway.
If someone with a greater reputation steals from you, like Timbaland, well, that's where it gets nasty. Your protection against this is the same; have enough of a reputation that it'll be found and at least brought to public light. The legal system is hit or miss here, but still the key way to protect yourself is to establish your credibility.
Get your work out there with your name on it. You can't protect yourself any other way. Every kind of copy protection for music, whether through streaming, DRM, or obfuscation by NSF, has been thoroughly useless.
So... sorry for making obfuscation by NSF slightly more useless; though I doubt this will amount to much.
I'm pretty sure *anyone* can tell this was a converted file and not the original in anyway. I mean seriously -- other than doing it for fun -- who in their right mind would do 900bpm single instrument music? More importantly, why would they showcase it off? And to another point - the pattern sizes give it away. A lot. v0.2 of this allows changable pattern sizes but that can change mid-song. Then it becomes even more obvious.
Delek's point is moot. Theft is not impossible to cease as it will always continue, but all this is really useful for is obtaining instruments and modifying the song for personal entertainment, as rainwarrior has delightfully showcased with his TMNT cirnosis.
The majority of copyright infringement happens in the world of mainstream pop music. The chiptune scene may seem big to us, but for the most part it is WAY under the radar of the pop scene.
As previously stated, instruments aren't protected by law, nor should they be. Imagine if you couldn't use a a certain guitar/amp/effects combination because that band over there already used them.
Anyway, this program encourages originality by demystifying most NSFs in existence. No one will care about your frame-by-frame cover of Bubble Man anymore. :O
I think that you're trying to change my opinion...
I'm not trying to change your opinion; I'm just pointing out some of its flaws, as well as the points that you've clearly missed from me.
For one:
Delek wrote:
I always will think that this reverse engineering software provides new tools to thieves.
By this logic (along with your other arguments,) you & I (as well as every FamiTracker user) are thieves because we use FamiTracker. Absurd to you, maybe, but it's true in every sense of your logic.
Why do I say that?
FamiTracker (& every other program that works with NSF, iNES & UNIF ROMs) was created as a direct result of reverse engineering the NES' hardware & software specs (against Nintendo's license agreement); specs which were compiled into digital documents & disseminated (without Nintendo's permission) across BBS & web forums (which is a clear, direct violation of Nintendo's copyrights).
In other words, by your logic, FamiTracker's illegal because it was created using illegally-obtained information. So is Marat Fayzullin's iNES & NSF formats. Therefore, we're all breaking the law by using FamiTracker to create our own NSFs. It's just as illegal as rainwarrior's creating the importer to analyze NSF data; that, clearly, isn't illegal in any way.
That's the point that you missed from me; you're worried about your own copyrights, when you're using a medium that was founded on violating Nintendo's own copyrights & company secrets. That's why I feel that your scrutiny on this matter isn't exactly as well-presented as it is well-founded.
As for that use of importing NSFs, I really don't understand the whole idea of this Cirnosis stuff that's been appearing lately, as good as the music is. I'm just glad that there's no Technosis. :P
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
An INCREDIBLE amount of today's music has at least 1 square or triangle pitch slide, or an "8-bit"(sarcasm) bassline, and I know of at least 1 song that incorporates both. To me, it's not really hard to say that the programs to create those and formats they are in, were developed by reverse engineering the original hardware, and/or ripping them from a game. So what you're also saying, Delek, is that methodds used to compose "real-world" music are to some extent illegal, because they include the stealing of methods of composing used by companies like Nintendo, Commodore, Atari, and a whole host of others.
_______________________
[BURNING LOVE] YouTube Twitter (Stay off my lawn, kids)
.png){kind=avatar}
) 
