Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Cwejman, Livewire, TipTop Audio, Doepfer etc... Get your euro on!

Moderators: Kent, luketeaford, Joe.

Post Reply
User avatar
forestcaver
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by forestcaver » Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:30 am

pld wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:20 am
forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:47 am
Honest question: why are you defending this lack of respect for Emilie’s wishes (ie the violation of the licence and original designer’s clear wishes and intentions). Do you think that everyone should take MI designs, adapt and then close source them, or do you think this exemption should only be for grayscale?
Doesn't that first require some definition of "at what point a work is stand-alone enough to be considered not just adapted, but protectable in its own right"? If one exists. I understand the hoopla about the Buchla modules much more than say Supercell.
With absolutely no legal knowledge, my feeling is that that threshold is not met when the originator feels it necessary to post their feelings on twitter.
Another good test may be the man on the Clapham Omnibus (a useful ethical test - actually a legal test in the uk - when the average eurorack user thinks it’s wrong essentially)
It’s a good question and I dont know the answer. The purist/absolutist in me wants to say “never”, but if you use the same value resistor then are you violating it? :-)

User avatar
pld
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1050
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:15 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by pld » Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:10 am

forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 5:30 am
With absolutely no legal knowledge, my feeling is that that threshold is not met when the originator feels it necessary to post their feelings on twitter.
Another good test may be the man on the Clapham Omnibus (a useful ethical test - actually a legal test in the uk - when the average eurorack user thinks it’s wrong essentially)
It’s a good question and I dont know the answer. The purist/absolutist in me wants to say “never”, but if you use the same value resistor then are you violating it? :-)
Heh :)
Even originators are fallible though, but I suppose one could argue they can still overrule. Mob rule? (yeah, no)
So I don't have an answer either. My threshold is probably lower though, I'm definitely not an absolutist ;)

User avatar
forestcaver
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by forestcaver » Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:53 am

pld wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:10 am
Mob rule? (yeah, no)
Not sure society has ever come up with anything better apart from limiting the size of the mob to twelve (ie jury)

User avatar
Prunesquallor
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:08 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by Prunesquallor » Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:08 am

Robot00 wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:48 am
Zerius wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:42 am
Robot00 wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:03 am
I am currently building my first eurorack modular and would like a variant of Clouds in it. I was considering Supercell, but after reading the recent discussion, I don’t want it at this time.

What alternatives do I have though if I want a high quality version of Clouds? Mutable doesn’t make Clouds anymore and most clones don’t look too good. I live in Europe so I don’t have easy access to some of the better clones available in the US either.
If it’s your first euro case, I would stick with OG Clouds with Parasites. You can easy find one on 2nd hand market. Super powerful module you won’t be disappointed, I didn’t try other clones yet but I’m super happy with what offers me the OG firmware and the upgraded one.
Thanks, OG would certainly be enough for me I believe. I need to start hunting for one 2nd hand, would definetily prefer new though. I guess there’s no hope of Mutable ever doing Clouds again, despite there being huge demand..
Emilie has allegedly been working on a follow-up to Clouds for some time. It's likely, but not certain, that this may be one of the last three MI modules she is to release. Keep your fingers crossed!
If at first you don't succeed read the instruction manual.

RIP Ziggy, the companion in my avatar.

User avatar
Kattefjaes
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:47 am
Location: UK

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by Kattefjaes » Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:45 am

Robot00 wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:03 am
I am currently building my first eurorack modular and would like a variant of Clouds in it. I was considering Supercell, but after reading the recent discussion, I don’t want it at this time.

What alternatives do I have though if I want a high quality version of Clouds? Mutable doesn’t make Clouds anymore and most clones don’t look too good. I live in Europe so I don’t have easy access to some of the better clones available in the US either.
Typhoon has been mentioned a couple of times, looks good. I have a Monsoon, which is great, but I do fancy the VCA stuff, internal random and Superparasites firmware. I was considering a Supercell, but after this fiasco, not so much- so Typhoon's on the list.

If you want to avoid trans-atlantic shipping, Pusherman are pretty reliable and seem to have some:

https://pushermanproductions.com/produc ... n-out-etc/

Reverb has plenty from random makers/sellers too:

https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=mo ... ion=EUR_EU

I mean, if Émilie's parting gift to Earthlings is a new, even better granular machine then I'm sure we'll be very curious too...
Last edited by Kattefjaes on Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JayEm
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:28 pm
Location: London, ON

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by JayEm » Thu Aug 13, 2020 9:23 am

Maybe you should take your personal shit elsewhere.
dialekt wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 10:17 pm
sempervirent wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:53 pm
thetwlo wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:04 pm
Just build your own code from the ground up instead of basing it on another's work. Everyone ok with that?
I love what you've done, but if you're not planning on abiding by the wishes of the original creator, then don't touch it.
This seems pretty black and white.
Well, to be clear, this is not about the code. The firmware is covered by a different license (MIT) that does not require changes to be published. (We published the Superparasites source code anyway FWIW.) People are using Mutable's code in poly synths, guitar pedals, etc and that's fine.

But in terms of hardware, even though I stand behind what I've said about CC the arguments in favor of reciprocity are making sense. It would be great if there was some way to do these types of adaptations without opening the door to cloning but that doesn't seem possible.
You have made a good amount of money on very little effort in comparison to people who actual design these modules. I don't understand why you keep trying to justify your greed and act like a victim.

Claim to fame here is you broke out the menu of a Mutable Instruments Clouds into individual controls, or am I missing something? That's like me boring out the engine in my Nova using that as an excuse of why I should own Chevrolet. You are not opening the door to cloning you were one of the first guys to open the door and now you are standing in the doorway. No Mutable Instruments, no lots of money in your greedy bank account keeping you stoned all the time. I hope to god you don't do the right thing here so people blacklist you all together.

You also didn't write a code. You have an alternate firmware. An alternate alternate firmware technically?

I don't see the "spare bedroom" cloners with dealers all over the world. I also don't see them selling buchla shirts on their website either.
BandCamp Instagram
"peoples moist elbow cruxes, sodden with phlegm" - Joe.

User avatar
Yes Powder
Powder that makes you say "Yes"
Posts: 1806
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:23 am
Location: Albany, New York
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by Yes Powder » Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 am

forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:47 am
[Honest question: why are you defending this lack of respect for Emilie’s wishes (ie the violation of the licence and original designer’s clear wishes and intentions). Do you think that everyone should take MI designs, adapt and then close source them, or do you think this exemption should only be for grayscale?
Did she not say that one of the reason she feels burnt out in working on the much clamored-for Clouds successor to be to be "crass" use of her open-source code? To be honest, I was really all about her being fully open-sourced software and hardware at the beginning until people started making exact duplicates of her stuff and selling them at prices she couldn't hope to match. I think sempervirent said that a big reason he took the PCB files offline was that a distributor who was looking to carry the Supercell basically threatened to make their own if he wouldn't sell it to them at prices they wanted. So who's the scummy one there?
To answer your question, I think that anyone who makes an enhanced version of a digital Mutable module should release the software, not just Grayscale. There's enough information on the original schematic for anyone who knows what they're doing to go from there.
By extension, I would be totally okay if Émilie wanted to make any further digital modules she made closed-source just so she can make some money but I know she won't do that because she said doesn't want any such outliers in her product line— also she doesn't say this but probably knows it would cause a massive shitstorm on the internet.

Of course I also recognize that my opinion means fuck-all and this is between Mutable and Grayscale right now.

User avatar
sydilaxe
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 617
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:27 am
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by sydilaxe » Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:25 am

Yes Powder wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 am
forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:47 am
[Honest question: why are you defending this lack of respect for Emilie’s wishes (ie the violation of the licence and original designer’s clear wishes and intentions). Do you think that everyone should take MI designs, adapt and then close source them, or do you think this exemption should only be for grayscale?
Did she not say that one of the reason she feels burnt out in working on the much clamored-for Clouds successor to be to be "crass" use of her open-source code? To be honest, I was really all about her being fully open-sourced software and hardware at the beginning until people started making exact duplicates of her stuff and selling them at prices she couldn't hope to match. I think sempervirent said that a big reason he took the PCB files offline was that a distributor who was looking to carry the Supercell basically threatened to make their own if he wouldn't sell it to them at prices they wanted. So who's the scummy one there?
To answer your question, I think that anyone who makes an enhanced version of a digital Mutable module should release the software, not just Grayscale. There's enough information on the original schematic for anyone who knows what they're doing to go from there.
By extension, I would be totally okay if Émilie wanted to make any further digital modules she made closed-source just so she can make some money but I know she won't do that because she said doesn't want any such outliers in her product line— also she doesn't say this but probably knows it would cause a massive shitstorm on the internet.

Of course I also recognize that my opinion means fuck-all and this is between Mutable and Grayscale right now.
Geez, it has been a while since I have posted here.
Based on the licensing model for hardware that Grayscale said they would agree to continue to support, the dealer could do that. The reputation for the quality of these modules versus the Grayscale versions would speak for themselves and since we all like to voice our opinions, the community would quickly respond to this in kind. My opinion is that these PCB designs were pulled from the repo ONLY when it became inconvenient and threatened the "business model." This seems like a piss poor decision on Grayscale's part as it is a huge reputational risk... they will lose potential customers who have never purchased from them. The responses from sempervirent have been pretty defensive, as if he was aware that feathers would be ruffled by this move. Regardless of whether we agree that this type of backlash is warranted or not, it is a direct result of making a decision and you can't play the victim card with that.

User avatar
betovelandia
Common Wiggler
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2020 1:02 pm

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by betovelandia » Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:33 am

sempervirent wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:53 pm
It would be great if there was some way to do these types of adaptations without opening the door to cloning but that doesn't seem possible.
That's the whole purpose of open source.

User avatar
forestcaver
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by forestcaver » Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:42 am

Yes Powder wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 am
forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:47 am
[Honest question: why are you defending this lack of respect for Emilie’s wishes (ie the violation of the licence and original designer’s clear wishes and intentions). Do you think that everyone should take MI designs, adapt and then close source them, or do you think this exemption should only be for grayscale?
To answer your question, I think that anyone who makes an enhanced version of a digital Mutable module should release the software, not just Grayscale. There's enough information on the original schematic for anyone who knows what they're doing to go from there.
By extension, I would be totally okay if Émilie wanted to make any further digital modules she made closed-source just so she can make some money but I know she won't do that because she said doesn't want any such outliers in her product line— also she doesn't say this but probably knows it would cause a massive shitstorm on the internet.

Of course I also recognize that my opinion means fuck-all and this is between Mutable and Grayscale right now.
Cool ! I agree - if someone chooses to closed source modules - that’s fair enough.
I also think cloners who are selling their clones especially in large volume should be called out (is it ok to build a clone for yourself and not sell it? I’ve built quite a few for myself - I now enjoy building and learning more than playing so I dint think I would have caused lost sales - but am I on the goodies side? I dont know - I think so but who knows? I’ve also designed/adapted quite a few derivatives from both MI and TiNRS that meet my own needs - not sold pcbs or modules though and I feel comfortable about that - all files are on github. Any money that has changed hands with regard to any pcbs I’ve gotten rid of has either gone directly to charity from me or as a donation from the recipient - to cave rescue, so I have made sure I have never receieved a penny from an open source pcb.
I agree about the firmware too! I didnt realise you were pushing Grayscale to release the firmware - apologies! But grayscale is under no obligation to release that as its mit and so far he has refused to do so (although pid has generously released the superparasites variant)
I also agree that there is enough information in the original clouds schematic to generate your own version of supercell but the point of these licences is that you can build on the work of others so you dont need to do all that work over again. There’s enough information in the dac and stm32 datasheets as well (provided you had the firmware source code) to reconstruct clouds but to do so would be a lot of work.... if everyone did that then progress and learning in the community would be slower...
It’s also not just between grayscale and emilie though - grayscale made commitments to the community about releasing the documentation. It’s also about whether we, as a community, are happy about this....
Last edited by forestcaver on Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
search64
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 4:48 pm

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by search64 » Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:46 am

Yes Powder wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 am
forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:47 am
[Honest question: why are you defending this lack of respect for Emilie’s wishes (ie the violation of the licence and original designer’s clear wishes and intentions). Do you think that everyone should take MI designs, adapt and then close source them, or do you think this exemption should only be for grayscale?
Did she not say that one of the reason she feels burnt out in working on the much clamored-for Clouds successor to be to be "crass" use of her open-source code? To be honest, I was really all about her being fully open-sourced software and hardware at the beginning until people started making exact duplicates of her stuff and selling them at prices she couldn't hope to match. I think sempervirent said that a big reason he took the PCB files offline was that a distributor who was looking to carry the Supercell basically threatened to make their own if he wouldn't sell it to them at prices they wanted. So who's the scummy one there?
To answer your question, I think that anyone who makes an enhanced version of a digital Mutable module should release the software, not just Grayscale. There's enough information on the original schematic for anyone who knows what they're doing to go from there.
By extension, I would be totally okay if Émilie wanted to make any further digital modules she made closed-source just so she can make some money but I know she won't do that because she said doesn't want any such outliers in her product line— also she doesn't say this but probably knows it would cause a massive shitstorm on the internet.

Of course I also recognize that my opinion means fuck-all and this is between Mutable and Grayscale right now.
Actually no. The reason I started this discussion here is to get the community involved by making what happened crystal clear. This is also part of capitalism, and I will vote with my wallet if a company acts irresponsibly.

Secondly, and again, while I welcome discussions on the merits of open sourcing in the first place, those arguments are irrelevant in this case. Use the open source files or don’t, but don’t use the files and then close them off.

User avatar
Yes Powder
Powder that makes you say "Yes"
Posts: 1806
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:23 am
Location: Albany, New York
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by Yes Powder » Thu Aug 13, 2020 12:14 pm

forestcaver wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:42 am
I also think cloners who are selling their clones especially in large volume should be called out (is it ok to build a clone for yourself and not sell it? I’ve built quite a few for myself - I now enjoy building and learning more than playing so I dint think I would have caused lost sales - but am I on the goodies side? I dont know - I think so but who knows? I’ve also designed/adapted quite a few derivatives from both MI and TiNRS that meet my own needs - not sold pcbs or modules though and I feel comfortable about that - all files are on github. Any money that has changed hands with regard to any pcbs I’ve gotten rid of has either gone directly to charity from me or as a donation from the recipient - to cave rescue, so I have made sure I have never receieved a penny from an open source pcb.
I agree about the firmware too! I didnt realise you were pushing Grayscale to release the firmware - apologies! But grayscale is under no obligation to release that as its mit and so far he has refused to do so (although pid has generously released the superparasites variant)
Completely agree that cloners who sell in large volumes get called out. I’m also happy to hear that you’ve been building for yourself; I believe that’s one of the things that Émilie wanted to happen.
As for the firmware, I think it’d be nice if Grayscale released it but I question how necessary it is (outside of “good faith”) since the Superparasites firmware basically makes the original Supercell firmware obsolete and is now installed on the all Supercells by default.
Last edited by Yes Powder on Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
pld
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1050
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:15 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by pld » Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:07 pm

Yes Powder wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 12:14 pm
Completely agree that cloners who sell in large volumes get called out.
It's kind of a tangent and I might regret asking, but since it's been broached -- has any large volume cloner ever been called out and what did that look like? Feel free to PM and I don't need/want names, but I have trouble imagining that being a success. Unless by success we mean shitshow, because even the phrasing feels icky.

As for the firmware, I think it’d be nice if he released it but I question how necessary it is (outside of “good faith”) since the Superparasites firmware basically makes the original Supercell firmware obsolete and is now installed on the all Supercells by default.
TBH I've thought of it as obsolete, but... there are some subtle differences in Parasites vs. the original so it might have some purist value? The nuances were lost on me and my laughably naive patches though and it's been many LoC since then, so I'd have to go back and review what they are. (And no, I don't have the plain supercell code).

User avatar
forestcaver
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by forestcaver » Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:51 pm

pld wrote:
Thu Aug 13, 2020 2:07 pm
It's kind of a tangent and I might regret asking, but since it's been broached -- has any large volume cloner ever been called out and what did that look like?
I’ve made comments and seen other comments on fb groups about some of the blatant ones. But that probably makes no difference.
But some of them even have distribution agreements with the big shops! Some of the blatant ones I’ve emailed and said I wouldnt buy from them because of the clones..... but I bet I just look like a twat and it makes no difference - I feel a little better though.... (but havent done that in a few years). Actually just checked a few of the ones I recalled sold many clones and they, at least, seem to be selling less of them....
But if everyone did that it may make a difference....

User avatar
sempervirent
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4399
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Republic of Cascadia
Contact:

Post by sempervirent » Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:56 am

Will respond to some of these comments later but just wanted to say that after further discussion with Emilie I'll be rebuilding the repos ASAP and making all the source files available again. Definitely the right thing to do and I have a much better understanding of how this stuff should be handled now.

User avatar
aroom
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 3:27 am
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re:

Post by aroom » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:06 am

sempervirent wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:56 am
Will respond to some of these comments later but just wanted to say that after further discussion with Emilie I'll be rebuilding the repos ASAP and making all the source files available again. Definitely the right thing to do and I have a much better understanding of how this stuff should be handled now.
goods news. thanks.

and fuck all reckless cloners.

User avatar
gelabs
Common Wiggler
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:27 pm
Location: Unifactor

Re:

Post by gelabs » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:25 am

sempervirent wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:56 am
Will respond to some of these comments later but just wanted to say that after further discussion with Emilie I'll be rebuilding the repos ASAP and making all the source files available again. Definitely the right thing to do and I have a much better understanding of how this stuff should be handled now.
You are doing the right thing :tu:
The planet was, I realized, one of the spots before my eyes.
sc - bc - yt - mg

User avatar
search64
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 4:48 pm

Re:

Post by search64 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:35 am

sempervirent wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:56 am
Will respond to some of these comments later but just wanted to say that after further discussion with Emilie I'll be rebuilding the repos ASAP and making all the source files available again. Definitely the right thing to do and I have a much better understanding of how this stuff should be handled now.
Good! Thank you for doing the right thing. My pitchfork will be safely put back in storage again.

User avatar
forestcaver
Ultra Wiggler
Posts: 877
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:41 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by forestcaver » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:48 am

Excellent - thanks for listening.

User avatar
drip.feed
Roll it off at 30 Hz
Posts: 3182
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:05 am
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by drip.feed » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:11 am

Kinda raises the question of what's the point of a creative commons license in the first place? Legally, Wes was in the clear; public opinion says Wes was out of line.

Given the public outcry in this tiny community when someone breaches, or even questions, the spirit of a license, why have an official license at all? Cloners will ignore it anyway. And people adhering to the letter of the license will get crucified.

Why not just GPL everything you can, and add a statement on your site saying "share absolutely everything derived from my work."?
Dripfeed

User avatar
pld
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1050
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:15 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by pld » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:40 am

Great!
drip.feed wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:11 am
Why not just GPL everything you can, and add a statement on your site saying "share absolutely everything derived from my work."?
I'd argue one effect would be even less sharing, you end up with derived works that don't acknowledge their source and don't release anything. It's then way more difficult to find abuse, except maybe the 1:1 cloneage. Although this is such a small market, perhaps the dynamics work differently.

User avatar
th0mas
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 717
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 9:36 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by th0mas » Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:00 am

drip.feed wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:11 am
Legally, Wes was in the clear;
That is but the opinion of one non-lawyer.

I don't want to debate it as there is no point whatsoever for synth nerds to chime in but only a court would actually determine that.

Just want to call that out since your post says it as fact.

User avatar
Kattefjaes
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:47 am
Location: UK

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by Kattefjaes » Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:05 am

pld wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:40 am
I'd argue one effect would be even less sharing, you end up with derived works that don't acknowledge their source and don't release anything. It's then way more difficult to find abuse, except maybe the 1:1 cloneage. Although this is such a small market, perhaps the dynamics work differently.
I think it does. The market and world is small enough that people are more likely to feel personally invested. Hell, enough people have dealt personally with Émilie (spoiler, she's incredibly efficient, civil and kind), It's a lot easier to personalise it. This is a specific person making cool, interesting, playful instruments, not some faceless corporation.

It makes sense that a bad actor who takes this work for free to try and sell it without paying their changes forward as open designs is going to piss people off. If you don't like openness, don't take and sell open designs?

Moreover, the damn users in this world are often people who understand enough hardware and software engineering that you'd have to obfuscate and rework stuff pretty hard to get away with it- possibly more work than the average cloner could be arsed to do. It feels like a bad place to pull that sort of stunt, it's very likely to end in tears. The list of brands that lots of people won't touch for various different reasons (Synthrotek, Blue Lantern etc.) tends to be one to avoid joining. Nerds bear grudges.

I hope this episode has been a bit of a brain fart that won't re-occur. If someone really has seen the error of their ways and understands that what they did was shitty, that's fine. If it's actual enlightenment and regret rather than just "I coulda got away with it if it weren't for you meddlin' kids" and performative remorse then it might at some point be OK to buy Grayscale products again. I hope so, I love the layout/design of Supercell, and had already cleared a space for one on MG.

User avatar
search64
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 4:48 pm

Re: Supercell: expanded version of Clouds + Superparasites firmware

Post by search64 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:19 am

th0mas wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:00 am
drip.feed wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:11 am
Legally, Wes was in the clear;
That is but the opinion of one non-lawyer.

I don't want to debate it as there is no point whatsoever for synth nerds to chime in but only a court would actually determine that.

Just want to call that out since your post says it as fact.
This.

On top of the open-source license, there are several instances of Wes promising in writing to release his modules under the same license. It would be interesting to see how much legal power those statements would have had.

User avatar
Rex Coil 7
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 7307
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:29 am
Location: Captain Of Outer Space

Re: Grayscale Mutable clones aren’t open source anymore?

Post by Rex Coil 7 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:40 am

TheNthMan wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:47 pm
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:50 pm
TheNthMan wrote:
Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:04 am
... If Grayscale did built the hardware entirely from scratch without referencing the open source hardware, then it may be true that Grayscale may be within the letter of the licensing ....
There's being inside the letter of the law ... and there's being a complete dick. What they've done may be legal or not in violation of some civil law shit .... but it's still a dick move. Kinda like being ~that person~ who takes the whole goddammed bowl of candy on Halloween when everyone else is adult and ~cool~ enough to not need a sign or a person actually guarding the bowl. Or the f-tard that pisses all over the toilet seat in the public rest room.

Immina take all of these free french fries, make hash browns from them and charge people for them!!!!!!! HELLS YEA BABY!!! GIT THAT MUNNY!!!

Legal or not, it's just a fuddup move and a grotesque display of a sense of entitlement (and God knows there's puh-LENTY of that shit going around these days).

:doh:
The part that you cut off I did say that Grayscale may be in the letter of the licensing but that his actions were disappointing and I was not going to make a purchase from him that I had originally planned on until the situation was resolved. Perhaps not as strong as you are wording it, but we are not disagreeing on the substance of the situation. Not sure why the selective quote to cut that part out of what I wrote. If someone is doing something you disapprove of, I find insulting them and calling them names usually does not make them all of a sudden change their minds.

Anyway, in the other thread he mentioned that he may re-think things. He admitted as much as to having taken the files down quietly in bad faith (ie not bothering to discuss this with anyone because he assumed that he would not be to come to a compromise). It is a strange hill to die on since there have been at least hundreds of people who have cloned the repository and already have the files, and he himself is saying that no one can claim intellectual property rights for circuit board designs. He said that taking them down was precipitated by some discussion with a vendor. Perhaps the vendor in negotiating their discount threatened to just clone the modules themselves using the files and cut him out entirely and he had a bad knee jerk reaction and did something rash and unwise. For the Buchla modules at least, since he is still in dev with them and has not released any modules, I think ethically he is still not on the wrong side yet. Even if he was complying with the spirit of the cc-by-sa-3.0, as he has not yet released that derivative work, he does not yet need to release the files.. There is time for this to be resolved without going nuclear, and I do hope that he finds a way to climb down and come to a mutually agreeable arrangement with Émilie. If he does right by Émilie, then I will be satisfied.

*Edit, the Buchla modules are available...
I wasn't quoting "you" (per se) I was replying to the concept of "letter of the law vs just being a shit". Nothing personal, it was a reply to the idea. The idea had to be ~quoted~ so the reader knew what I was referring to. This is an open discussion in an open forum, I took something uttered during that discussion and extended the concept. Nothing personal towards you.
5U MODULAR NORMALIZING PROJECT (for your entertainment) viewtopic.php?t=78836&highlight=
.. as of Dec 8th 2020 on a break for a bit .. contact me via bamco60@hotmail.com if needed.
WELCOME TO 2021 .. THE BEATINGS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES.

Post Reply

Return to “Eurorack Modules”