2

If i am using the GNU-licensed software "Open Metronome" (https://sourceforge.net/projects/openmetronome/) to create the basic rhythm of my own music, I am wondering if I can freely distribute the resulting music (including commercially)? Or if I am bound by the GNU license terms?

This software basically creates a very simple beat based on your choices of instrument (clapsticks, bass drum, etc.) and the speed that you select (bpm). I am wondering if the sound of the instruments in this software is somehow copyrighted and would restrict me from using it freely?

I understand that the OUTPUT of a GNU licensed program is generally not covered by the GNU license, but I also read that an exception is where the software contains any art or text that is also showing in the output. In this case, I am wondering if the sound recording of the different instruments would qualify as such?

Cori
  • 21
  • 1
  • From a quick look at the project: is it in any way specified under what license the WAV and/or MIDI voices are made available? (Were they created by the project author? If not, the project author quite possibly doesn't have the right to release them under the GPL in the first place) – Philip Kendall Jun 04 '23 at 11:22
  • 3
    You should probably read this question and its answers, then let us know if that has dealt with your question (and if not, what remains to be answered). – MadHatter Jun 04 '23 at 12:36
  • For this particular package, it seems that the sound samples themselves have a separate license file attached. Please look at the readme file(s) inside the archives Samples_Original.zip and Samples_Fluid.zip. I suspect 'fluid' refers to FluidSynth. For that program, the situation is the same. Here is the directory which contains the license file for the FluidSynth samples: https://github.com/FluidSynth/fluidsynth/tree/master/sf2 – Brandin Jun 06 '23 at 06:57
  • 1
    As for whether 'using' such samples to make one's own work itself would be considered a derivative work of the samples (e.g. in the absence of an explicit license) is a more complicated legal question and it's probably better to clarify that on law.stackexchange.com if you have a legal question about that. – Brandin Jun 06 '23 at 06:59
  • @Brandin I am sorry but I don't exactly understand what FluidSynth has to do with OpenMetronome? – Cori Jun 09 '23 at 12:34
  • @Cori When I looked at the packages, I saw one of the soundfont files had "fluid" in its name and I probably assumed it had some relation to FluidSynth. However, upon further inspection of that file and the notes inside it, it appears that that's not the case. In any case, though, like the FluidSynth program, the license of the program itself and the samples should be regarded as distinct: (i.e. FluidSynth synthesizer, Open Metronome program have one license), while the samples (i.e. the Fluid sample pack(s), and the sf2 files that ship with Open Metronome) have some other license. – Brandin Jun 09 '23 at 12:53
  • As an alternative, it seems Open Metronome supports MIDI output. So you could use that MIDI output to send to your own hardware or software synthesizer and then use that output. However, if the synthesizer uses digital samples (which I imagine most synthesizers do nowadays), then you'll have the same fundamental question about whether the license on those samples can restrict your output. I don't know the real answer, but if it makes you feel better, professional musicians use digital samples all the time and it seems like they rarely get into legal hot water. – Brandin Jun 09 '23 at 13:14
  • I remember talking to a professional musician once about this issue and his (non-legal) opinion was that as long as the final output was not a 1-to-1 copy of each original digital sample itself, then it was OK. That was not a legal opinion, though. It was more of a rule of thumb. So, imagine if you had "creative output" which consisted of a "composition" which was designed to just demonstrate 1-to-1 copies of each digital sample of the original sample repertoire (e.g. each note of a digital piano at various loudnesses). Maybe that's crossing a line into the "not OK" territory. – Brandin Jun 09 '23 at 13:18

1 Answers1

1

Unfortunately, this program is very complicated. As you mentioned, the GNU GPL does not apply to exiting a program unless it copies itself there. So unless the samples you use are under the GNU GPL, neither will your music.

I downloaded the Samples_original.zip and Samples_Fluid.zip archives, and it looks like Samples_Fluid SHOULD contain Fluid SoundFont samples. I downloaded a copy of it from the Web Archive Wayback Machine (https://web.archive.org/web/20121015090653/http://soundfonts.homemusician.net/files/FluidR3122501.zip) and it looks like (in the FAQ, so not a formal license) you can use this soundfont, and donations are welcome but not required.

There are various samples in Samples_original.zip, for example from freesound. I looked at one of them (https://freesound.org/people/FranciscoPadilla/sounds/22742/) called 39 Hand Clap. It is licensed CC-BY-NC, i.e. non-commercial use. But after going to the Wayback Machine (https://web.archive.org/web/20111016150352/http://www.freesound.org/people/FranciscoPadilla/sounds/22742), I saw that it used to be available under the CC Sampling+ license (special license for sampling, see description here).

Unfortunately, researching so many samples is a bit of work, so if you care, you'll have to check everything yourself. If you do, you can share your report with the OpenMetronome project by uploading your it to SourceForge discussions.

For you, however, the safer option would be to make your own samples or find CC0 or other alternatives and replace the files from these archives. Just e.g. for hand clap, clap yourself and record it.

I didn't find any music files in the source code, so the only sound that can come from these sources is synthesizer.

This is not legal advice

Maniues
  • 870
  • 3
  • 12