Is a Kemper Morally ok with you?

[reverend1]

Interesting point brought up by Dave Friedman, and Pete Thorn on a recent podcast.

Is a Kemper really just theft? Many modeling amps will skirt around which amp they model, and pedal builders will copy other sounds and do the wink and a nod thing. What about Kemper's? If you think about it, they straight up steal (copy) the sound of someone else's work. Without even having to go through the trouble of reverse engineering.

From what Friedman was saying a lot amp builders are pretty upset. He relayed a story about many people buying his amps, putting them into the Kemper and returning the amp. Whatever you think of Kemper, that's bullshit. It sounds like some amp builders are coming together to try to take action against Kemper.

What do you guys think? It's an interesting debate.

 

[Help!I'maRock!]

I think those amp builders should put out their own digital models and IRs. Then they can complain people steal those too.

 

[reverend1]

I think those amp builders should put out their own digital models and IRs. Then they can complain people steal those too.

Friedman did mention he licensed IRs but I don’t recall to whom.

 

[sleewell]

 

[reverend1]

I’m just asking. I find it interesting people get all upset about people copying a Klon, but copying and amp builder’s intellectual property is completely fine. I don’t see a difference.

 

[Help!I'maRock!]

Friedman did mention he licensed done IRs but I don’t recall to whom.

I think Line 6 has one.

 

[Help!I'maRock!]

I’m just asking. I find it interesting people get all upset about people copying a Klon, but copying and amp builder’s intellectual property is completely fine. I don’t see a difference.

There's different levels to this argument. Some are valid, some aren't. To mis-quote George Carlin, you've just got to find what level of bullshit you're comfortable with.

 

[yabba]

I dunno.. Buying an amp, profiling it, and returning it is morally sketchy, but doesn't seem really like outright theft. If you profile it and then sell that profile, that seems more clearly wrong..

Is the amp builder's IP the circuit layout, etc, or the tone itself? Can tone be IP? The kemper isn't actually copying the circuit layout, just the tone.

 

[Deep Eddy]

If the amp manufacturer has not obtained a sound trademark, then I don’t think they have any legal recourse for modeling the sound of the amp. They may have a cause of action against Kemper for trademark or copyright infringement if Kemper is using the names and/or logos if the other manufacturers.

If you are asking specifically about ethics or morals, then that is a different question. Kemper needs to determine what it values as a corporation.

 

[yabba]

If the amp manufacturer has not obtained a sound trademark, then I don’t think they have any legal recourse for modeling the sound of the amp.

(I'm assuming by sound you mean the physical phenomenon, not "solid/good").

Can sound be trademarked? is there any precedent for that?

 

[reverend1]

I dunno.. Buying an amp, profiling it, and returning it is morally sketchy, but doesn't seem really like outright theft. If you profile it and then sell that profile, that seems more clearly wrong..

Is the amp builder's IP the circuit layout, etc, or the tone itself? Can tone be IP? The kemper isn't actually copying the circuit layout, just the tone.

Yeah, the buying an amp and returning it is something I really find problematic. If you buy something with no other intention than to copy it and return it, you have real issues.

 

[yabba]

Yeah, the buying an amp and returning it is something I really find problematic. If you buy something with no other intention than to copy it and return it, you have real issues.

agreed. For that matter, buying something with the intent of returning it even if you don't copy it is pretty clearly abusing whatever return policy is invoked, IMO

 

[Honkridge]

I don't know man. I buy low cut dresses, take them out for a night of debauchery and then return them. No one bats a eye.

 

[Psychotronic]

Interesting point brought up by Dave Friedman, and Pete Thorn on a recent podcast.

Is a Kemper really just theft? Many modeling amps will skirt around which amp they model, and pedal builders will copy other sounds and do the wink and a nod thing. What about Kemper's? If you think about it, they straight up steal (copy) the sound of someone else's work. Without even having to go through the trouble of reverse engineering.

From what Friedman was saying a lot amp builders are pretty upset. He relayed a story about many people buying his amps, putting them into the Kemper and returning the amp. Whatever you think of Kemper, that's bullshit. It sounds like some amp builders are coming together to try to take action against Kemper.

What do you guys think? It's an interesting debate.

I never considered that, but it's an excellent point, and I think I agree that it is, in fact, theft.

 

[Lerxst]

He relayed a story about many people buying his amps, putting them into the Kemper and returning the amp.

IDK, that doesn't sound totally plausible.
If you have a kemper, or any other modeler suitable for your uses, are you still out there buying up boutique amps at several grand a pop?
Aren't the modeling patches sharable/transferable? If you could obtain a patch of an amp from someone else or purchase the patch, they would have no need to buy and return something that costs a few grand or more. Why would I go to that extent of expense and effort?

 

[Psychotronic]

IDK, that doesn't sound totally plausible.
If you have a kemper, or any other modeler suitable for your uses, are you still out there buying up boutique amps at several grand a pop?
Aren't the modeling patches sharable/transferable? If you could obtain a patch of an amp from someone else or purchase the patch, they would have no need to buy and return something that costs a few grand or more. Why would I go to that extent of expense and effort?

Strikingly similar to the Napster controversy, then.

 

[baimun]

I think the best argument I've heard for them is from custom amp builder Dr. Z himself....

https://www.drzamps-zgear.com/store/c8/DR._Z_Kemper_Profiles.html

He sees it as another tool to get your real amp tones out on stage, and has actually seen demand for his amps go UP from people liking the profiles and then wanting the real deal for the studio.

 

[Ignored Member]

But... but... modeling never as good as real thing... copying boutique amp that copies Marshall but with more fuzzies... doesn't have real feel of valvulators and plower transforminator... speaker combing and brushing... mic axis....

 

[Lerxst]

Strikingly similar to the Napster controversy, then.

Kinda sorta except for the fact that pedals and amps are often built on the shoulders of designers that came before from an IP perspective, if not blatant copies.

 

[Deep Eddy]

(I'm assuming by sound you mean the physical phenomenon, not "solid/good").

Can sound be trademarked? is there any precedent for that?

Yes, I am referring to the physical sound (tone?) of the amp. Sound trademarks exist but I don’t think they are easy to get - Harley Davidson was probably the most high-profile one. HD attempted to trademark the sound of its motorcycles but was unsuccessful.