Is there a market?

Ok, I have literally thousands of sound samples one of my collegues in the film industry has 7 CDs of.
They range from birdsong to shopping mall backgrounds, work site backgrounds, supermarket backgrounds, ALL kinds of stuff...erm squeaky doors opening, glass shattering, engine sounds, car skidding etc etc

Is there a market for this?

Also theres loads of "beats" like samples from dance tracks maybe someone could make an in world DJ mixing booth??

(If I found one after the date of this post Im sueing! lol ) jk

Many of our customers are builders and sim owners so I "think" they would sell.

Lastly the longest sound file SL will accept is 10 seconds so Im looking for a free and VERY EASY TO USE piece of software I can download to clip and fade or loop.

I know the animated txtrs I made are selling like crazy as I dont think anyone in SL actually makes them " as textures " so ppl can add them to prims and sell as a " creation"
I had no idea the market on those at the time I created them

Suggestions...would you use them? For personal or stuff you would make and sell?

Certain "environmental" sound clips I'm sure would sell, as well as things like the squeaky door you mentioned - if, as always, the prices were right.

But for them to be useful they'd have to be full perms ... which brings you back to the same problem you have with selling textures.

Resellers.

I'm not quite sure I understand you, but if you're thinking of selling those sound efffects from that "7 CD collection", more than likely, you'd be breaking the law.

First things first...

You MUST determine what the license/copyright status is of the sound clips. Many production sound libraries have a "NO REDISTRIBUTE" clause as part of their license. What that means is that you CAN incorporate the sounds into other works, but you CAN NOT sell the sounds separately in a standalone sense. You need to obtain the license/copyright info from the author/publisher, and then and ONLY then will you be safe reselling them, if it is a permitted use.

Second, Audacity is a free sound mixer/utility that is very good.

http://audacity.sourceforge.net

I wouldn't pay for them myself but I have heard people buy anything.

There are a couple of people who do this already - but have smaller collections. I use various products by SoundScapes fairly extensively at the Gardens.

I believe there is a market. I currently use Soundscapes and Acoustic Alchemy, and a couple others actually. Some of these are very good, some are not. I feel there is room for more variety.

Some people may say, oh a stream is a stream, a bird is a bird... but I'm always on the hunt for something better than what I currently have. But that's me.

Except the problem is actually worse in this case because the typical use of a sound file is to just copy its UUID from inventory and use that in a script. It's not like one can just paste the sound into a prim and have it play, as one can paint textures, so some script is necessarily gonna be involved. And I really can't envision a workable EULA requiring that any scripts using the sound file's UUID be set to... well... what permissions?

Also may be worth noting that in-world scripts just cannot guarantee skipless playback of spatial audio under all conditions. Even the best in-world musical instruments will falter on occasion.

All that said, though, I've paid for good environmental sound-clips. They're a real pain to vend and shop for, though: there's an unknowable interval required to download a new sound to a shopper's viewer for listening before purchase, and easy for the shopper to advance the vendor way beyond the clip they're listening to, and end up buying the wrong thing. If the sim isn't download- and script-lagged, this doesn't have to be a huge problem, assuming sensible vending scripts.

As others have said, unless your friend's collection of sounds is comprised of clips he created himself, it's doubtful the license agreement would support what you want to do. Royalty free sound libraries usually allow the use of the sounds embedded in commercial work but not resale of the library or individual clips. Make sure you give the license a thorough read through. Having said that, if it's not breaking the license agreement, I'm sure there'd be a market for them.

The license for those sounds is probably a royalty free thing. Your friend, or I suppose you if you are the current owner, could use the sounds in a project potentially even a commercial one. You however are probably stricly prohibited from reselling those clips.

Go crazy and have birds chirping all over your lands? YES!

Chop up and upload 7 CD's of copyrighted works to resell? NO!

There is probably a market for copyright material. Your friend might not be too pleased if the distribution of that material gets pinned down to him, the film industry is not particularly forgiving on copyright infringement.

As others have stated, the licensing on sound collections, particularly those intended for the film industry, tends to be very strict. There may well be a market for the sounds, just like there's a market for pirated video games or for stolen cars. But that doesn't mean you should do it. Respect copyright, always.

If you do in fact have rights to resell or otherwise redistribute the clips, then go for it. I'm sure people would buy them, as long as you charge some amount less than the upload fee for them. I usually make my own sounds, or else I use freebies (with proper licensing), but if I were to stumble across one in-world I could use that would cost me less to buy than to upload myself, I'd certainly consider it, as long as I were reasonably certain the seller wasn't distributing them without permission.

That said, I highly doubt the CD's in question come with the kind of license you'd need. I have yet to see a commercial sound effects collection that does.

OK it is of my understanding that these sound effects are "his" as in he made them created them yadda yadda
HOWEVER.... lol considering the business I am already in for 4 yrs in SL whilst I appreciate the repeat warnings about EUAL and Copyright... I kinda " am " aware of such issues and of course would NOT bring in something to SL that would damage the reputation of a 4 yr successful business.

I will need to check and double check and Chip, I know your a "giver" and thats really kind I have often complimented you on your genrous nature but
If i was to sell them they would be in the same price range as competitors. I cant work in RL and SL is my "job" I pay taxes and VAT and land fees, classified fees.
I am not ashamed I am wanting to make some profit here if ( and only if I am 100% certain I have rights to distribute ie: the guy gives me his written agreement to ) The time it took my friend to collect these and for me to clip and loop them is worth more then "less than upload fee"
Also you sell ANYTHING less than upload fee ( and trust me Ive been in the business long enough to see it happen ) and customers "assume" you found them free off the net
You dont add value to your own "creation" and customers wont either and this leads to an increased chance of resellers. As most resellers dont want to spend big bucks to scam they target low cost or freebies. This is why i advise ALL texture creators not to sell their work for upload fees. Consumers always assume " L$10???? MUST be freebies off the net ... I will resell it also "
This leads to point 2) ( as mentioned )
Full Perms.
The mass ignorance on " full perms" over ruling real life copyright laws in SL is vast.
The amount of ignorant excuses and justifications Ive heard about how LL TOS claims if something is sold FP then its tough tittie for the creator yadda yadda
And yet LL will and have removed our textures from resellers stalls. As have SLX.
We sell with our own EUAL and Im sure Chip knows Copyright is born at the point of creation.
" I paid therefor they are mine" is something I hear over and over again by igorant ppl swapping textures in texture exchange groups.
It sickens me as they call me greedy for wanting to protect the worth and originality of mine and TRUs artists work.

We dont complain because of lost sales...its the principle and lack of igorance these ppl use to their advantage.

So on that closing...I probably wouldnt sell them. And I doubt very much anyone that took the time to actually record these sounds and clean them up after... clip fade and loop them would sell them in SL either.
As someone said... textures can be easily ID'd ... we have enough time dedicated to hunting down misguided resellers with those... I sure as Hell aint gonna leave myself wide open to Sounds too.

They would have to be sold No Copy. Which would take away the whole point and as someone else says they just grab the UUID and load it into their own script.

Thanks for the feedback... Ill stick to what I do best

I've never been sure about this. I've been told by others, off-forums, that it _is_ OK to upload these because you are making them part of a "video game" (Second Life) that you happen to be contributing work to. Essentially, it's just as if you were writing a game on your home PC, and you put a shop in the game where you could pay game money to gain the right to play that sound whenever you wanted during the game; except that others are working on the game too and you have a neat networked arrangement set up for doing so. This applies because the sounds can only be used inside Second Life - it's not possible to download and save the wave file, which is what those licenses are really trying to prevent.

Those people weren't lawyers, of course, but I wonder if there's any definite disproof of this.

Has there ever actually been a court case over copying of a texture? (Not simply a DMCA takedown because those are automatic unless challenged)

I wish you luck Lilith.
I do understand, we all want good things for ourselves.
I am bit hurt if the slam was towards me.
I personally don't sell stuff very often but I have done private hand painted textures for only for few most were friends and only asked for upload fees but they were free to donate more.
I don't steal them from the net. Out of years I have created only on one hand I can count that I have ever photo sourced from another texture.
One a famous sl sculptor has one recolor plant I did on exhibit that will never be sold.
My friend said I shouldn't have that put that on my hand painted texture in sig but I don't
have the luxury of being well known either.
We all have to start somewhere.
And I don't have very much in rl either I live below poverty level and also disabled in real life.
I am pretty much bed ridden.
Yet personally I don't expect to make living here, I just want to create personally.
Yes it would be nice to have the means to have few extra things.
But not all of us have the luxury to do so.

Yeah, I just want to make sure I was clear about that: It's not that there's something nefarious about using a Sound's UUID in a Script; it's the *only* way it can be played. It's possible for a Script to be written that only uses the Sounds in the object's inventory, but that's an extra instruction or two and extra contents in the object, so pretty much nobody does that.

HOWEVER, kinda like Gestures that contain sounds, the sound *Scripts* can be the item of resale, for which there is rather better permissions protection than for sound clips or textures. (Of course--as RIAA knows all too well--anything that can be played through a client machine's sound drivers could theoretically be re-recorded, just as an object-applied texture might be captured at the graphics driver, but at least "sound scripts" are on kind of a level playing field with other SL asset types.)

Hmm. I hadn't considered that, LillyBeth, but it makes sense. I guess I was looking at it too much with only my own point of view in mind, which is "Hey, I can make that, so why would I buy it unless it's somehow cheaper not to make it myself?" I guess not everyone would think that way, since not everyone's the DIY type.





Yumi, with all due respect to you and whoever told you that, I must say I've rarely seen a more completely convoluted interpretation of copyright. What you're saying is 100% completely, absolutely, and without question, incorrect.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that you can take any sound that belongs to someone else, stick it into a larger medium like a video game, and then somehow it no longer belongs to the person who created it? That's simply ridiculous. If a sound belongs to someone else, it's theirs, period. You cannot use it without their permission, ever*. The presence or absence of a video game makes no difference at all.

The truth is that if you put someone else's sound in your game without their permission, then you're guilty of IP theft, copyright infringement. It's the same thing if you take someone else's writing and publish it in your book, or someone else's painting and reprint it on your posters, or someone else's music and record it on your album. You can't do any of those things.

Copyright is copyright is copyright. If someone else created a piece of work, be it a sound or anything else, then by default that person owns the copyright to that material, not you. You cannot take it and put it in a video game or any other medium without their express permission. Got it?

It sounds to me like the person who told you otherwise is probably someone who routinely steals IP himself/herself, and has made up this twisted version of copyright principle, simply to justify his/her own actions. That happens all the time. This particular version is a little more bizarre than most, but people do make up their own versions of the law all the time, just so they can try to convince themselves they're doing nothing wrong. I'd pay good money to see what happens if those people try to explain their interpretation of the law to a judge some time.



That would only be true if you owned the sound in the first place. You cannot use someone else's sound, and have it automatically become yours, just because the game is yours.

And if it happens to be a networked game, to which others are contributing, the same goes for them too. Each person can only contribute what actually belongs to him or her. No one can take something that belongs to someone else, and use it without the permission of the owner, ever*.


Wrong again. What those licenses exist to prevent is the unauthorized use and/or distribution of copyrighted material, which in this case happens to be a sound, in ANY medium. The file format is completely irrelevant. What's matters is the sound itself, not the method by which it happens to have been stored on a hard drive.

Trying to turn copyright on a sound into a matter of file format is analogous to trying to make copyright on a written a matter of what color ink it was printed in. You're basically saying "Well, that Harry Potter book was originally printed in black ink. I'm gonna copy the text, put it in my book, but print in blue ink, and then everything will be OK. Since the ink color has changed, and since that particular ink can't be taken out of my book and used anywhere else, I didn't actually steal all that Harry Potter text." Does that sound like it possibly makes any sense to you? If it does, seek therapy. You shouldn't be allowed loose on the streets, man.

Also, careful what you say is "not possible". I won't say how, of course, but it's certainly possible to capture a wav file from SL, or from any other source.


Yes, there's definite disproof. It's called copyright law (not to mention common sense). Read it. You don't need a law degree. It's in plain English.

At the very least, read this: http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

And this: http://www.templetons.com/brad/copyright.html

The first link is an excellent article, called 10 Big Myths About Copyright Explained. The second one is a companion piece, intended for those who know nothing about copyright to begin with, which clearly you don't.

Where the law is concerned, what you don't know can hurt you (and others). So read up. You have a responsibility to educate yourself. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, and neither is "But really, Your Honor, my friend made up this really cool way to misinterpret the law. You should listen to it."



I'm not aware of any case over just a single texture. That doesn't mean one hasn't or couldn't happen though. If someone steals a texture of yours, and you want to sue them over it, that's your right.

Speaking more practically, though, DMCA takedown notices exist in part to help keep these things out of court. If every person who had their copyright infringed upon had no recourse but to sue, then it's likely the courts would never have time to get anything else done. Takedown notices are a bit of a buffer in that sense. They enable the matter potentially to be dispensed with fairly quickly and painlessly, outside of court, but still with legal teeth.

That said, if I were to feel that someone's actions had damaged me severely enough, you better believe I wouldn't stop with just a takedown notice. That person would be hauled into court just as soon as could be humanly possible. It's doubtful that any one texture could be worth the bother, but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility.









*Technically, you can use a copyrighted work without permission for certain purposes of making commentary, parody, news reporting, research, and/or education about the copyrighted work in question. That's not what we're talking about here, though.

In fact I have been looking for lullabys to add to my baby furniture, I have found sounds inworld, but not what I was looking for.
Prices are also crazy, some creators sell them at an accesible price, others go really above the roof.
So a good sound, with a reasonable price I guess would be a good product.

Please let me know if you do

Sorry - with that statement, I was talking about items that are purchased outside of Second Life with a redistribution license, such as sounds from music libraries or animations or 3D models from professional graphics sites. Their licenses usually state that you cannot redistribute them on their own, but you can do so as part of a larger work. The question is whether selling them in Second Life counts as redistributing them on their own, or whether it counts as making them part of a larger work (that larger work being Second Life itself).

No, obviously if you have not been given permission to redistribute the material then doing it via Second Life makes no difference. I'm not doubting that.



I understand. But what I'm trying to find out is if there's a real legal precedent (that means a judge said something) saying that "they said I couldn't resell that texture but there was a big tick next to the resell box so I got confused" is not a valid defense. I know that we all want it not to be, because texture artists have no other choice, but I wondered if there was any actual precedent on the matter. Most texture stores have warnings saying they have filed successful DMCA takedown notices, but since they are automatically successful unless challenged, they don't indicate a legal precedent.

SORRY FOR THE REPEAT POST...IM NOT EXP IN FORUMS LOL AND i COULDNT FIND MY EARLIER REPLY SO ASSUMED IT HADNT BEEN POSTED.



Having created and sold textures for SL for 4 yrs in April whilst for the last 2 yrs manage the distribution of digital artwork from 50+ artists for TRU I am educated in the IP and copyright laws of real and second life having our own copyright agent who collects data for DMCA notices.

So, whilst I do appreciate the feedback I must point the above out.

My friend gave them me specifically "for" TRU and distribution and as far as I am aware these are his personal collections. That said, we did discuss I would need something in writing confirming the files were owned and created by him and he gave me full distribution rights.

The point about people reselling was an issue I too was concerned about. Its one thing to ID artwork being distributed by someone other than the creator in SL but sounds would be much harder and as mentioned, people can use the UUID code and add to scripts puts me off the whole idea.

Shame. I think they would of been a great addition to sim owners and content creators in general but even if sold on a no copy basis they can just add to a script and make multiple copies that way so on that basis alone I see potential abuse and Its unlikely I would bring them into SL because of that threat.

Thanks for the feedback however

If you used them as part of something you were building and selling in SL that could only be used by your customers as part of the object/project they're embedded in, I don't think that would violate the license. If you sold them as raw sound files in SL for other people to use in their projects then you'd be violating the redistribution portion of the license.