Are IR's actually copyrightable ?

M

mongey

Inspired
Not really wanting to start a full on debate on the morality of sharing stuff .Its a complicated thing these days and everyone has their own line in the sand , and people will do as they want anyway

.But was wondering are IR's actually copyrightable ? with such a short file how would you actaully be able to prove where it originated from ? it seems to be a bit of a booming businees these days but is there actaully anything other than the honour system stopping people from sharing everything they buy ? with the Helix coming 3rd party IR's could become much bigger business in the hands of more users


for what its worth I believe in supporting artisits and creators. I have given donations to users who's banks I have downloaded and have paid for probaably 1000's of IR I never use lol .that said if I had a mate who wanted to try an IR I'd give him a file. chances are if he likes it he will buy the pack . I wouldnt feel right about sharing more than a file or 2 to check out though .
 
Last edited:
For something to be copyrightable (not really pretending to be a lawyer here so this is my understanding) it has to be a unique creation. An IR would probably be copyrightable as it’s something unique that you have created where you have your speaker, your mic(s) with your individual mic placement and so on. And it’s impossible that someone even with the same speaker and same mic’s would create something identical.
 
Johan -

While I might disagree that they are YOUR mics or YOUR speakers, it's hard to dispute the issue of placement. I have wondered about this, and I think you have just nailed why IR's can be copyrighted.
 
plyall said:
Johan -

While I might disagree that they are YOUR mics or YOUR speakers, it's hard to dispute the issue of placement. I have wondered about this, and I think you have just nailed why IR's can be copyrighted.
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry, that’s what I really meant. You haven’t created your speakers or mics so they wouldn’t be copyrightable themselves (at least not by you). Sort of like how a brush, canvas and paint or not copyrightable, but the painting is.

On a similar note, it wouldn’t be possible to copyright “greenback IR’s” so that no one else could create IR’s with greenback speakers. Only your final individual created IR’s would be copyrightable.
 
With the thousands and thousands of IRs out there already how could anyone actually tell if an IR has been stolen ?
 
And then comes the big subject : Mixing 2 copyrighted IRs makes an unsource-able IR, so what's its copyright ? Theoricaly, it's also copyrighted, but on this earth i can't see how something that can't be back-traced would prove an infrigement...
 
I threat proprietary IRs as services: if I have my bus ticket, I cannot share it with another guy, even if I leave the bus.
 
There is the law and then there is enforcing the law, the latter of which no one is going to spend the money to do.

In the largest scale copyright rip off in United States history, the original Napster file sharing, exactly ONE person was prosecuted out of hundreds of millions of participants around the world.

Unless you're a Fortune 500 looking to make a point, odds are copyright theft is ignored. Sure YouTube pulls videos when asked, but by and large a copyright is based on the honor system.
 
Interesting ! I would think it would be too subjective, if the creator of one IR didn't disclose how it was shot there would be no way of knowing if someone else infringed on that some IR.
 
Just something you guys seem to completely ignore: Copyright laws are different from country to country.

Also, people tend to mix up the words patent, copyright, intellectual property and trademark as if they were the same.

A copyright prevents everyone but the owner from copying his own creation. Hence why it's called a "copy-right". It works automaticly; there is nothing you have to make an application for. This applies to everything from your kid's drawings to the IRs you shoot. Enforcing a copyright can be a troublesome thing, as you have the burden of proof. It doesn't really matter what it is; you copy it without asking the creator, it's technically illegal. You are also not allowed to alter or change the work of someone else. However, you are allowed to replicate it from scratch. This is called "reverse-engineering".

The practical meaning of this in terms of IRs:
You can reverse-engineer an IR with the same equipment as the author and make your own IR that sounds exactly the same and has the same mic placement, etc; but you are not allowed to modify or redistribute the original IR directly. This also means that you are not allowed to mix it with other IRs per definition, as long as the author explicitely permits it.
Also, you are not allowed to trade your legitimate replica under the name of the original author or the original resource if it is trademarked, as then you'd be guilty of trademark infringement.


Think of it like this: you can replicate a shirt from a well-known brand. You can even sell your replica. But you're not allowed to put the name of the brand on it. This is not due to copyright, but due to trademark laws.
 
Last edited:
AlGrenadine said:
Yes, but having the same curve wouldn't prove a copyright infrigement i guess as the source material could be the same speaker/mic/placement...
Click to expand...

I think it's easily argued that it's impossible to reproduce, precisely, the same curve with two different set ups. No two mics, pres, speakers, rooms, etc. are the same. You will always have minute differences. If they are *exactly* the same, it's a copy not a coincidence.
 
iaresee said:
I think it's easily argued that it's impossible to reproduce, precisely, the same curve with two different set ups. No two mics, pres, speakers, rooms, etc. are the same. You will always have minute differences. If they are *exactly* the same, it's a copy not a coincidence.
Click to expand...
Yes, but what about an IR you tonematch ? It will not be precisely the same curve...
 
The 2048 samples that makeup the IR probably can't be copyrighted. It *is* possible for another IR to be created that has the same sample values. However unlikely.

But, if you sell IR's, you can impose restrictions on distribution of the IR's. The EULA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yek
iaresee said:
I think it's easily argued that it's impossible to reproduce, precisely, the same curve with two different set ups. No two mics, pres, speakers, rooms, etc. are the same. You will always have minute differences. If they are *exactly* the same, it's a copy not a coincidence.
Click to expand...

A battle of forensic experts over Cab Lab 6, update at 11.
 
AlGrenadine said:
Yes, but what about an IR you tonematch ? It will not be precisely the same curve...
Click to expand...

That'd be a copy, but maybe it's a loophole? I mean all of this discussion is nothing -- a copyright might exist, but only a court can test that assertion and is an IR worth lawyering up for? Maybe in time, but I'm not sure it's worth it right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom