Deadmau5 roars, and FL drops all melodic content? Hey, whatever – FL users stay loyal to their app and it’s now BYO sample time. Photo (CC) iamdonte.

The FL Studio community was rocked earlier this month as producer Deadmau5 claimed the use of his samples was “stealing,” even though these samples were bundled with the software and assumed by most to be licensed royalty-free. FL Studio developer Image-Line has not responded to a CDM request for comment, but they did talk to MusicRadar.com. Managing Director Jean-Marie Cannie told that site:

We’ll remove all melodic loops from FL Studio to avoid this kind of stuff in the future but that won’t change a lot I’m afraid. Our demo material has been stolen 1000s of times in the more than 10 years we have been doing this. The difference here is that this time it was stolen from a user that made it big.

I’m going to ignore for a moment the question of how “that won’t change a lot” – people will be able to steal demo content even when it’s not there? That aside, there are two odd things about this story:

1. Image-Line seems to helped create the problem by shipping sample content in software without being clear which license covered that content and which is which, then responded with the inexplicable argument that that sample content was supposed to be for “demo” purposes only (with nothing that I can see to back up that statement, and evidence that precisely the opposite was the case). No one is angry enough to dump FL, because it’s an excellent tool, but I sure hope Image-Line learns from the experience.

2. Many users are nonetheless responding “good riddance” to the loss of sample content.” For a lot of people, the bigger question here really is artistic, and maybe it’s time for computer musicians to draw a line.

“Demo” Samples – or Sample Content?

Let’s go back in time to the samples themselves, before the user DirtyCircuit produced a song with these samples and before Deadmau5’s response. If we give Image-Line the benefit of the doubt, there are two ways they could have avoided trouble. One would be to label what they call “demo material” so that it’s clear it’s not supposed to be used. The other would be to include an explicit license prohibiting certain kinds of use – I’m no fan of legalese, but then they’d be legally covered.

The problem is, they did neither. Image-Line and Deadmau5 seem to have entire fabricated the idea that this is “demo content,” as many FL users and CDM readers have noted.

(highlight mine)

The content is listed under a section called “Packs” in the default content included with FL, in sections called “Loops > Drum Loops” and “Loops > Melody Loops.” Claiming this is “demo” content is downright disingenuous, because the same section includes individual notes of samples of drums and instruments for keymapping and even synth and plug-in presets. To say it was “stolen” has to be one of the oddest comments ever made by a software developer. It almost implies that making any use of default parameters is intellectual property theft, which, while I suppose it’s ideologically pure, would be absurd. Image-Line almost went out of their way to make this content accessible to its users.

These sample packs aren’t mentioned in the documentation, but downloadable sample packs are one of the selling points of the program, and that is in the marketing materials. As near as I can figure, Image-Line actually made up the idea that these were demo samples because they wanted to make Deadmau5 happy.

What Rights You Get with FL

Updated: if this were demo content, it would be covered under the End User License Agreement for FL Studio. The license is explicit in that case:

“The Software and the Demo Songs, in its entirety and each part of it, are protected by Belgian copyright laws, international treaty provisions (Convention of Bern) and European Directives.

You acknowledge and agree that the Software, including but not limited to the source code, the structure and organization, and the Demo Songs in its entirety and each part of it, are proprietary to IL and/or its partners and that IL and/or its partners retain exclusive ownership of all right, title and interest in and to the Software, Demo Songs, documentation and trademarks. As producer(s) of the databases contained in the Software and the product package of the Software IL and/or its partners retain all sui generis rights in the content.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, IL shall in no event claim ownership rights to new and original music made by using the Software.”

EULA for FL Studio

Furthermore, that has been communicated in plain English by Image-Line support:

* You can not use or sell any of the songs/loops that come included with FL Studio. If you want to use parts of it, you can contact the original creator and discuss this issue further with him.

* You can not license, copyright, sell or distribute in any way the individual samples & sounds, or make samples packs out of it.

http://support.image-line.com/knowledgebase/base.php?id=36&ans=41

Of course, you’ll notice an inconsistency here:

1. Image-Line never does make any included sample content royalty-free, which is unprecedented in music software. (The loops that come with programs like GarageBand, Ableton Live, and every other app I can think of are explicitly made royalty-free.)

2. The EULA says only “demo songs,” and is entirely mum on the question of sample packs.

3. The support FAQ says “loops,” but that’s never made clear by the EULA.

It would be correct to say that the Deadmau5 samples would be off-limits if they were part of a demo song. The problem is, what are they doing in the “Packs” section, where it appears to be among other royalty-free samples? Unlike the demo songs and samples, those are free to use in your own songs – you just can’t resell them on a sample disc, for instance.

Here’s what Image-Line says about the samples they provide free when you buy the product. They’re available as a separate download, but then, that doesn’t make this make much more sense.

All samples are royalty-free, which means you can use the samples in your own compositions and songs without paying any further royalties. You are not allowed, however, to resell or redistribute any or all of the samples as a sample pack or sample CD.

The thing is, the demo songs are a completely different part of what ships with FL. You can find various demo songs in a folder called “Cool Stuff.” (You can try all of this out with the FL8 demo.) “Faxing Berlin” is indeed a Deadmau5 song, but the loops from the song just show up in the Packs. There is a Deadmau5 demo song included with FL, but it’s a different song (“That’s not true,” which is oddly appropriate for this situation.)

It’s obvious, then, that Image-Line fumbled the way these samples were distributed and labeled, the way the license was expressed in the user agreement and support, and in their reaction to the whole affair after the case. It’s possible Image-Line didn’t communicate adequately with the artist, that the artist signed away rights without examining the consequences, that the samples actually got put in the wrong folder, or some combination of all of the above. We haven’t gotten clear communication from I-L, though, explaining what the heck happened.

Obviously, the fix is pretty easy:

1. Artists, be careful with your samples, or assume your fans will be able to differentiate. (In fairness, the actual Deadmau5 track is to me obviously superior to the DirtyCircuit “remix.”)

2. Developers, be explicit, both in legal documentation and in communicating to your users.

In the meantime, I’d like to see future versions of FL that are clearly labeled and clearly licensed, and I don’t think there’s anyway to argue in this case that they were. I’d also like to see a clarification from Image-Line of what, in the current EULA and software, actually is licensed to the users, because this isn’t typical of competing packages.

Artistic Response: Presets, Begone!

Some people are, predictably, upset by the whole affair – and I think they have the right to be frustrated with Image-Line for being apparently incapable of handling content that ships with their own software.

The surprise is, a lot of people are actually glad to see the “Loops” out of the Fruity. You can read endless responses from forum members who say this kind of sampling is bad for the perception of the tool, because it overshadows the genuinely creative work a lot of people are doing with it. Once you get out of the legal and developer-specific issues, you really do get into the question of the artistic merit of the sample use. In my view, using a sample – any sample, regardless of license – as the basis of a song without significant modification amounts to plagiarism. It may be perfectly legal, but if you aren’t placing that sample in a new context, and you’re claiming it’s “your” work, you’re doing something dishonest. Now, we can debate all day about where to draw the line, but the problem isn’t sampling, it’s, say, taking a couple of samples, looping them endlessly, and calling it a song. Odds are, you won’t even have to have a debate about that, because a lot of people will simply lose interest musically.

Among many users of a program with “Loops” in its name, and among readers of this site who are themselves often fond of sampling, a lot of people would like to be done with sample content in general. On a simple, practical level, samples you don’t need from other people’s songs can get in the way of your work. A number of readers of CDM said they’d be happy to be done with this sample content and demo songs just to save room on their hard drive. (Happily, some installers give you a choice; I know Cakewalk’s SONAR 8 allows you to uncheck the sample projects on install, only because I just installed it.)

You can read the extensive comments on the previous story, but these two lines from wi_ngo pretty much sum it up:

I LOVE the Grey Album.

I HATE factory patches/loops/presets.

In other words, sampling is fine. Preset content is boring. Sampling without doing anything with those samples is playing a track, not really sampling.

So, most of the frustration at the moment seems to be that Image-Line not only botched the release of these samples in the first place, but isn’t communicating clearly in the aftermath. (I think the latter is the real problem, even more than the former.)

But all fruit, no loops? That sounds just fine to most. And none of this seems to be dampening enthusiasm for Image-Line’s flagship music tool.

Final score:

Deadmau5: 1. More publicity for Faxing Berlin.

DirtyCircuit: 0. The original is better.

Image-Line: 0. Totally muddled the situation before, during, and afterward.

FL Studio: 1. Happily, people still like your software.

Preset content: 0. You’re gone. No one will miss you.

Samples, unmodified, as the core of a song that’s not a “remix”: 0.

Community policing: 10. See also: Crystal Castles. Forget the license, forget the law – in the Web age, music fans have become the final arbiters of what matters – and artistic value matters.

Xfer Sample CD, Anyone?

I had almost forgotten – on top of this comes the oddly-timed news that Deadmau5 will be releasing his own sample CD – yours for a hundred bucks (US). Friend Steve Duda hand-coded some DSP, as well.

Stranger and stranger – Duda says:

“we saw a niche for one geared towards building blocks of EDM with a twist – this one is royalty-free, so it can be used in original productions with no fear of legal repercussions from the original artists who often are sampled on other CD libraries”

Well, unless I missed something, the only legal repercussions I’ve seen from sample libraries are the Deadmau5 FL Studio libraries. I don’t know of any other sample libraries that have uncleared samples on them, as that’d indeed make them worthless. So, no chance this is related to the separate FL issue, is there?

I’m also trying to wrap my head around this one:

One thing for certain, the sounds of the XFER Sample CD will be featured on dance tracks for decades to come.

I enjoy Deadmau5’s music, but to me the idea that this particular sample library will be featured in dance tracks in 2040 is not “for certain.”

(I imagine I’ll still be getting bizarre spam comments on posts I’m writing now on CDM after I’m dead, but that’s another matter.)

In case you’re planning your dance tracks for when you’re 64:

Deadmau5 Xfer Sample CD-ROM presale

  • Gogmagog

    I agree with your viewpoint concerning sampling and plagiarism. The more unmodified a sample is, the longer it is, the more its context remains unchanged between the original and "new" song, the worse it reflects on the artistic and creative talents of the sampler/DJ/poser.

    However, I don't think unbundling demo loops from these apps is going to help much in that regard. People will still think ripping a 20 second sound bite from a song and looping it endlessly qualifies as something "new" and "fresh," no matter where they get their samples.

  • Jaime Munarriz

    do I understand that a series of, uh, 6 or 9 consecutive notes is owned by, uh, Deadmous5… ?

    c'mon, wake up, let's run a combinatory program and register all the possible melodies.

    that will make us rich – or stupid.

    intellectual ownership really needs a deep change for the next connected civilization.

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    Well, Jaime, yes, that's exactly what's being said. And if you loop those 9 notes endlessly for the course of a song, you don't get a very different result. ;)

    Anyway, whatever your thoughts are about ownership, here's the bottom line: the owner and user have to agree, and the user has to *understand* what license they're getting. If you want to use an open source program with Creative Commons-licensed samples, you can. (Try Ardour, for instance.) But if you used that program and then found out that the license wasn't what you thought it was, you *and* the developer could wind up unhappy. So the questions of ownership aren't the point. The question is whether the developer can successfully communicate to the user and the artists from which they're licensing what the license IS. Image-Line completely botched that here, and I'd like to see them to do more to clear the whole thing up.

  • Lord Kook

    Meanwhile, on another side of the galaxy, Deadmau5 and his labelmates are releasing their own sample DVDs. To be honest, between the FL debacle and Deadmau5's shit-talking about DJs in his interviews, I'm a little leery about giving the wunderkind any more of my money.

    I am, however, extremely curious to see if the Faxing Berlin melody loops ends up on his own sample CD set! :D

  • Ruud

    Image Line did sell FL Studio with 2 gigs of content as a selling point, which is all stored in the Packs section. So they're having a big problem here by including these non-royalty free loops of Deadmau5.

    From an FL Studio customer point of view you could say that, like DirtyCircuit, Deadmau5 used the FL Studio loops to produce his song Faxing Berlin, even without renaming the song…

    Funny detail about this whole matter is that the FL Studio programmer Gol hates the ogg-format in which these Deadmau5 loops are distributed, because these are inferior to WAV-files. He also states that you can't use one loop for 5 minutes and call it a song, which is correct, I think.

  • Mad Al

    Gosh, more Deadmau5 controversy. Looks like its time to invest in some glue traps…

    My two cents: Image-Line dropped the ball, and are now playing semantics to try and cover their collective behind. They want us to believe that when they say "sample loop" what they really mean is "loop provided as an (ex)sample", which is in no way the commonly held plain meaning of the words (and isn't that a lovely ball of legalese for you). And it seems a little dishonest to throw around accusations like "our demo stuff has been stolen 1000s of times" when they haven't actually labeled any of it as "demo" or "our" and just lumped it under all of the program resources. It seems something like selling a sample CD and then trying to claim that some of the tracks were only included as demonstrations of how a sample might sound, and shouldn't be thought of as being "part" of the sample CD.

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    @Ruud: Exactly right.

    It's silly to begin with to be taking these OGG-format loops and making a whole song out of them.

    It's equally silly that Image-Line is claiming these are "demo" content when they're labeled as "packs," and anyway, what developer releases samples in this format and thinks users won't use them? (That means I can't use the individual synth presets, either? Really?)

    All of this does a real disservice to one of the best-written music apps and synth collections on the planet.

  • http://www.kentsandvik.com Kent Sandvik

    Ho ho. This was silly.

  • http://myspace.com/corticyte Corticyte

    That was the main thing that annoyed me about Fruity Loops. Drum & Bass is really big where I live (UK) and there's a plague of drum & bass 'producers' who just download a torrent of fruity loops, bash together tracks out of the bundled loops and think they're talented producers!

    I can't stand drum loops, let alone melodic loops. I have to have control over every aspect of the sound from the ground up.

  • http://fourstones.net victor

    how hard would it be for Image-Line to bundle a gig or two of CC-BY samples? How about all the stems to Brad Sucks two albums?

    just sayin…

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    @Victor: What, actually tell your users which content is under which license? Or distribute software for music production with sounds that can be used for music production? Where's the fun in that? ;)

    I suggest instead releasing a preset that's unspeakably aesthetically horrible, waiting until someone not only uses it but hits export, then immediately having the app self-destruct. It'd be like Digital Aesthetics Management. (DAM)

    Oh, and don't try to use that idea. I'm about to patent it. ;)

  • Prof Kaoss

    OK, I'm not an FL user but under what license did Image line use the deadmau5 samples.

    Did deadmau5 not think by offering these samples/demos to a major software manufacturer that they may not be used by someone else ?

    Also from what I hear of deadmau5, esp the 'live' shows he owes more to the samples he uses than anything else, does he pay any performance royalties for using samples in his 'live' shows?

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    @Prof Kaoss:

    In Deadmau5's defense, the blanket license for FL says that "demo" content is not covered under any royalty-free license. If that was the deal offered him by I-L, then he's in the right.

    But you're right, there's very often a big disconnect between clearance for released recordings and what people do live.

    What's interesting to me, and what I think is a new element in all of this, is that the community of makers in this case is rejecting the idea of this sampling in general — at least as far as mindless, cut-and-paste music and DJing. There's a sense that the musical community values custom-programmed material. That takes the whole economy around the music and takes it in a different direction, because it says intellectual property rights / income from sample clearance get devalued, and what people really care about is what went into the music. Given the number of big-name acts who turn to people you've never heard of for the actual programming, if that trend were to spread to the people who influence ticket sales, music consumption, bookings, etc., I think you could see a real power shift in music. It's still got a long way to go, but it's got really nothing to do with the licensing issues that dominate the headlines. It's a whole different ball game, and it's a trend I think almost no one is talking about.

  • http://fourstones.net victor

    "at least as far as mindless, cut-and-paste music and DJing"

    That's a big "at least" – it's the difference between creative and not. It doesn't surprise me that musicians who are threatened by the idea of sampling as a technique jump all over this case to point to the worst, most uncreative use of an art form to besmirch the whole thing.

  • http://www.protoolerblog.com stiff

    Reminds me of more than one magazine that shippped with CDs filled with loops for the readers to create music with. It wasn't until you read the very fine print you realized you weren't allowed to use them for more than your own satisfaction at home. Ridiculous.

  • http://rekkerd.org ronnie

    <cite>Preset content: 0. You’re gone. No one will miss you.</cite>

    +1

    FL Studio should only include royalty free samples/content, if anything.

  • zenzen

    For me, yes, good riddance. Just give me the tools and charge less. That's how I started (what does this do? what can I do with it? what if I just turn this…oh!). There are indeed deeper philosophical issues that I don't have the intellectual skill or passion to argue here. I just remember how excited (and confused) I was by the bare essentials and the idiosyncratic music that resulted.

  • poopoo

    i had never heard of deadmau5 and I never would have if it wasn't for this storm in a teacup.

    apparently this is a video of deadmau5…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XflcNySfco

    …imho it's his best work.

  • teej

    there was a similar thing with Ableton Live a long while back. they put up all these artist sample packs for download. some were cool and i made a few tracks with them, then after reading the fine print they all stated to be for "demo use" only. way lame.

  • c.db.sn

    is it just me or does deadmau5 come off like that pasty computer guy who always got beat up in highschool, has now made a name for himself making music, hangs out with the rich and famous and now acts out to make sure that no one else does the same?

    his music is not amazing or terribly interesting IMO, but the same can be said about a lot of club music.

    why does the guy need to be such a jerk?

  • http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

    @c.db.sn – Well, I'm inclined to give Deadmau5 the benefit of the doubt for the simple reason that (as in teej's example) Image-Line may only have *paid* him for / licensed "demo" content and not royalty-free samples. I still say it's Image-Line's job to communicate effectively to the artist from whom they're licensing and to their customers.

    Of course, this does illustrate how a Creative Commons license can actually get you attention and money. We've got people who hadn't heard his work before. If someone takes your samples and does a middling remix, you say, here, listen to the original — it's better. If they go and do an amazing remix, then that can obviously be great for you (Radiohead sure got more attention for their album this year with all the remixes, which is also better than hearing your DJ play the same darned song on endless repeat). It's not a sure thing that a CC license works from a business or promotion perspective, and it's not for everyone. But there is clearly potential there to make it work for you.

  • gbsr

    kinda funny. i just got myself some shitty dance music to cut up for my own pleasure (yeah, mashups are so 2004, so what?), and amongst them is deadmau5. or however its spelled. quite funny though, cause most of the synth lines are presets, possibly tweaked with some cut/res action but thats it. hes getting all annoyed when people are stealing his sound, when hes using the factory sound. how ironic is that?

  • http://www.p5audio.com/ Dave

    Fruity Loops stock samples suck. A good producer knows where to find high quality sample sounds. That's a huge part of the process.

  • Damian Wilbur

    Very interesting article indeed. Thing is, what the hell are people thinking in regards to sampling. If I were writing a research paper I couldn't simply lift entire sections of other people's text without attributing that work to them. I honestly think that as musicians we should be taking the high road. Slapping together a track with someone else's melody (non-cleared, non-attributed) smacks of a complete lack of integrity and creativity. If we are striving for nothing more than the creation of new sounds, why do people rip off or even 'use' other people's extended samples? In my own productions I follow a basic guideline regarding sampling– no use of other people's loops in any way- outside of a single, reprocessed percussive hit or reprocessed sampled instrument. This way, I don't ever run into questionable legal ground—and I ensure my music is 100% original from a structural perspective. Afterall, shouldn't integrity and creativity be weighed equally…regardless of what some vendor is encouraging by providing melodic loops for unstudied 'producers' everywhere? Perhaps we should start a 100% free and clear utopian movement called 'Cleartronica,' which has but one goal– composition of music with no invasive sampling whatsoever…then again, maybe that should just be a given when dealing with music production in general. It all comes down to integrity in one's work I suppose.

  • mazigazi

    I always wondered, at what point does a sample that is owned by someone else become something not owned by them? let's say I take a sample from deadmaus5, run it through 5 billion effects, stretch it, slow it down, speed it up, reverse it, etc, etc. Is the end result still "intellectual property" of deadmaus? I rarely use samples myself, but the few times I have, I've done exactly that… they have been sort of a starting point for me, or something to fill in a blank when nothing else comes to mind.

  • http://www.mutantpop.net/radioclash/ tim from Radio Clash

    Corticyte wrote:

    "Drum & Bass is really big where I live (UK) and there’s a plague of drum & bass ‘producers’ who just download a torrent of fruity loops, bash together tracks out of the bundled loops and think they’re talented producers!"

    Irony is one of the most important and first drum and bass tracks was created from a Future Music sample CD (#1) – Origin Unknown, Valley of Shadows.

    It's not where the samples come from, or whether they are preset or whatever, it's what you do with them. I'd rather have a load of samples to mess around with and change rather than none?

    And some of the best ever tracks have had an obvious loop(s) right the way through – but they work, and the ideas are good. And some of the worst IDM involves every sound warped/farted/sample from the dog and is boring as shit, even if every sound is 'original' doesn't make it good.

    It's what you do with it that counts! And all art and culture is founded on plagiarism – smart plagiarism making a different, new whole.

    The problem is the lack of ideas, rather than presets. Take the presets away, the ideas are still not there…

  • http://osc1.wordpress.com/ osc1

    many of you commenting are missing alot of point. this isn't about the sample packs, those were fine. this was about the demo material that people submitted to Fruityloops for use as demonstrations for using the program. Within the demo file, which is just a regular fruityloops project, is all the samples and patterns the person used in his/her song. These are what have been ripped. The majority of the samples included with Fruityloops do not come from the demos but sample packs created/licensed by IL themselves… which is no big deal and I doubt you'll see any change there.

    Image Line was STUPID not to have each user sign contracts for this usage instead of making a bad judgement call on faith. I and many others out there have done demo songs for many many companies and they ALL require contracts.

    Sure, Deadmau5 is a douche bag, but it's Image Line that dropped the ball here as they made no move to protect or cover any usage rights of the demo and it's contents/samples.

    This is all hilarious to me because how many times in the past the real demo/tracker scene has been ripped off this way. It's quite ironic really.

  • pushtobreak

    Let me get this straight…people like the Grey Album by JZ & the Beatles, made from genius and hundreds upon thousands of dollars worth of production (not to mention years of experience) more than they like a couple of gigs of loop sample packs made for a few thousand bucks in a few months. No surprise there. It's like saying I like a Mazarati more than a Hyunda.

  • meimeimei

    Deadmau5 is arrogant

  • Toyota

    A friend of mine asked me "What is that faxing Berlin loop from?" and I told them. They went and bought heaps of his boring music and are now a fan.

  • billyjoebob

    Judging from the picture he looks like an arrogant bastard. I mean I can see both sides to the story but something about that giant mouse head makes me want to get a baseball bat.

  • http://www.myspace.com/matthewtuszynski Dj DONATELLO

    k so i just finished a song using the faxing berlin drum loop behind my main drums uhh, am i going to get into trouble? check it out at myspace.com/matthewtuszynski iono u cant really tell but u kinda can

  • Kevin Krunk

    The problem with these forums and comment deals is that you all say the same thing over and b/s a bit much…. who cares if deadmau5's samples cant be used in your song and who cares if your bitter about the simplicity and complexity of making a good track. You guys are haters… The dood makes epic tracks, enough said…. post a site to your music if you think yours is better….

  • mike

    Interesting that this guy bitches about stealing…

    Just a lil tidbit for everyone… the whole deadmau5 mouse head, logo etc… all stolen!!!

    He blatently took the idea and design from a famous japanese artist named "Takashi Murakami". Some of his artwork that goes way back in years, looks EXACTLY like the stuff deadmau5 is using today.

    Hmm….

  • donna

    Thats right. Murakami for many years has made 100's of variations of this mouse head art. Below is a link to just one of them.

    Deadmau5 needs to shut his er..trap and stick to making tunes.

    http://english.kaikaikiki.co.jp/artworks/eachwork

  • http://www.chemich.co.cc/ Chemich

    @billyjoebob;

    Just don't sell the song and you won't have to worry, my music is always free but I never use loops anyways.

    I just beef up everything so it sounds nothing like the original instrument, though most of the shit I use I make myself, so I don't have to keep remaking old FL samples to sound the way I want them to.

  • Yadgyu

    Biting is HIGHLY recommended!

  • jdt

    Pretty poor form for anyone to use any sample/loop unaltered as the basis for an (ahem)"original" work. But then on the other hand, I can't believe how often you see somebody asking, " How do I get X's bass-drum-synth-lead sound…". Really now if you are that intent on copying your hero, don't bother selling your work.

    I do have to differ a bit on the synth preset issue however that popped up in some of the posts in this thread. I don't see anything wrong with using a preset, if that is the sound that fits your tune. And I haven't seen many synth EULA that prohibit using them. That's why VSTi come with presets after all, isn't it?

  • m

    haha.. far out.. Image-Line really put there foot in it here..

    i never really liked FL studio much anyway.

    yeah very ironic that Deadmau5 is releasing a sample cd just as this happens…sounds just like he complained at some point with the sample cd in mind..and its caused a big fuss, and Image Line are trying to cover their asses and being complete units in the process, thats not much of an answer.. but yeah good riddance to those loops :P

  • tohnee

    as everyone has already mentioned..

    his mask design is takashi murakami's original design!

    talk about biting..

  • Martin Harp

    So, Deadmau5 stole the mouse head design from Takashi Murakami, who stole it from Walt Disney?

    They look similar, maybe even inspired by one another, but that doesn't mean they stole the idea. It could very well be a complete coincidence. It happens all the time. Even in music.

    Some people choose to use samples (not my preferred choice) and some choose to create everything "from the ground up". Using samples doesn't always mean you're not as creative as the guy that built the entire track from scratch. Of course I would never side with someone that takes loops and doesn't do a thing with them to make them unique, but to each his own. Just like those people made the choice to use samples, you can make the choice to not listen to their music.

    Music is supposed to be something you enjoy. If you don't enjoy it, you're listening to the wrong music.

  • jadedmau5

    well maybe if some electro producers had more distinctive sounds/voices this would actually be something i cared about . But when you just plug in a western musical style melody(12 notes per octave) into a sixteen step sequencer around some sort of unst,unst,unst,unst, four to the floor kick drum pattern and some white noise builds, you're bound to get ripped off,sampled from or even completely copied by accident from . It's faceless music so it's hard to say anyone that makes such faceless stuff can really own it or control it . In other news rumors are that they are over-booking joel so much these days that they are having trouble getting him to venues(but hey it makes uber-cash yo') on time and they have another dood that's skinny just put on the mau5 head and press play on a preset set….

  • john summer

    i love deadmau5 but is e seriously going to bitch in complain for a couple fucking loops the guy packs arenas and sells thousands of albums and he's worried that he's not going to be compensated for a couple tracks that probably took him like 30 minutes at best and had no intention of using in his songs. That's a little petty if you ask me.

  • http://twitter.com/SwooshyCueb Merrell

    This is one of the many reasons I don’t like FLS.

  • Merrellistupid

    welcome to 4 years ago dumbass