My query concerns the terms and conditions of the End User License Agreement.
In particular these sections.
5.2 Contents a) In principle, the Contents - with the exception of Live Sets - may only be used for non-commercial purposes. This also applies to music, video or photo data as well as the corresponding templates acquired through or by means of MAGIX Products.
And;
c) Exploitation of Contents outside the scope of personally created work, i.e. separate from the work results achieved with the Software, is prohibited in all cases. In particular, the photos contained in the templates may not be extracted and used separately. This applies to both Commercial and non-commercial Uses.
If you need or want to look at the whole document you can find it here.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the implications of that clause and it's implied restrictions. I completely understand the idea of copyright and the need to protect commercial and intellectual property, especially in digital form but individual elements within an effect being separated to give a different look to an existing effect I don't understand. There may be elements within the effect I don't want to look as they present it. I may wish to remove or replace a piece of accompanying music or just alter its timing, or replace a background with one of my own.
Even within Magix's Music program the samples would come under the same restrictions.
And yet If I muted a track within an effect is that the same as altering it? And then added additional tracks for overlays?
For instance, In templates/ objects / fun. The lightning effect. If I don't want the clouds above to appear and I use another effect; Size / Positioning to place the clouds above the frame and then enlarge the lightning forks I have not disassembled the effect or altered it as such. Another way around would be to produce my own lightning.
In one respect I find this completely nuts but understand Magix's dilemma.
I don't have this problem with other programs dealing with audio for instance. Loops can be added to or altered, There is no restriction on soft synths being played with a certain preset of sound. How can a company produce a product and then restrict the output it produces?
Altering base code or trying to sell an altered effect made from one of MEPs own stock items or similar misuse I can understand but the rest leaves me baffled and in a quandary about what I'm able to share publicly even if I make no profit from completed item.
Surely, as with some forms of art, a piece that has some external content but remade to the point where it no longer closely resembles the original and has had some considerable effort in making it an original piece in itself comes under fair use, or does it?
If it's not fair use or even if it is, the way I'm reading the agreement at present is that if I want to use MEP creatively and share the results then I must make all my effects from scratch that contain any visual or audible content. Perhaps even the fades and other templates. I'm just not sure.
What are your thoughts or experiences? Would any of this for instance have an effect on your tutorial videos?
Here is an example, only viewable if you use the link on this page. I've been trying to put another opening title together ready for going out to film the event this weekend.
Do you think I have violated anything from the terms above?
Have I misinterpreted the clause? I'll be the first to admit my interpretation of legalese is not that good.
Thanks for your thoughts and advice.
Ray.
