Indeed audio "watermarks" are a figment. There are tracers that can be placed in final rendered files (adobe mostly comes to mind for attempting this) that can allow determination of whether the rendering app was legit or not. This was mainly targeted at video and photographic files. But there are many ways to remove such things if you suspect them. There are many ways to "cleanse" rendered files from meta-data tracers as well.

To address the original topic of conversation;

Given the fact that you are not a large studio enterprise (they are getting fewer an farther between these days) and you're doing your own production, mixing, and mastering, producing a final result that came from your own hands. How would anyone know that you used warez to produce your product unless you released this information yourself? Non-legit "sample" content, depending on its position in the mix can be slightly altered to make it undiscernible to any prying eyes, ears, or copyright infringement sweeps. I don't see an issue really.

 

Last edited: Jan 24, 2025

There are clean ones?

 

Yes for almost 10 months now

 

https://www.discogs.com/lists/Artis...wwQQxjvi7a2oS2WVp63073QtO0_Sle85BIwUeDsSkNKHj

Artists in prison ... the discog list. Don't risk it guys!!!

 

that really has nothing to do with making music with iligal content

 

They can still do pirate downloads on their prison cellphones at least.

 

Oh, yeah, espesially #46 from that list...

 

It also depends on:
- the license of the original sounds and how aggressive the authors are about enforcing it
- how used/abused the sounds are throughout film/commercial industry
- If your track hits the charts, it will get more attention, and someone will recognize your sample and may request proof of purchase.

While it's merely an ethical issues for personal use, once money and commercial success becomes relevant, there is risk and you can find reports of such issues on the web. In fact, there has been instances where a producer or label is sued even after a decade for retroactive damages. So consider use-case.

 

Its completely correct. I didn't say you can't use samples. I said some of publishing houses don't want them. I get briefs regularly for commercial work -some of them don't want Splice, some don't want specific Omnisphere patches, and MOST of them exclipitly say 100% original content is required. Anyway, the topic was illegal samples, and they can get you in trouble. Just use GPT to find court records of using music sample packs without proper license in commercial work.

 

People get in trouble when they use pirated plugins or samples in work that goes public. Companies check licenses and they can take your music down fast. Use free legal VSTs and royalty free packs so you stay safe and keep full rights to your tracks.

 

All my tracks are done with illegal stuff.

 

Artist's true rendition of Capitan Crunch and not the misdirection avatar...and unapologetic rebel.

 

I only evaluate the software, then uninstall!

 

When I use samples, I simply rename them.

How can someone prove that it's theirs, and if so, can they prove that they invented it? Why wouldn't several artists worldwide have the same idea? No judge will allow a lawsuit for stolen drum samples, regardless of the source.

Stealing is part of the game.

It's different with complex melodic structures. If you steal them and the sample is a bit longer, then you've stolen the wrong song. SoundCloud or YouTube might not even publish your video or song because their AI scans and blocks the song/video. A simple example: you have a 10-second sample from television of a famous actor; that will definitely be blocked.