How some learned to stop worrying and love the spinchip

[Chankgeez]

"It’s an unbelievably complex subject. Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

[Jwar]

I paid for those sounds, and I'm not sharing them or profiting from them in any way

to be totally pedantic and off the point, if you're being paid for music made using this gear, you totally are.

This right here is the truth.

What will probably result from all of this is builders using a bit extra money to lock the coding so it cannot be tampered with. At least that's what I would do. I doubt they imagined this could ever be an issue, but if you think about it, copying even an algo is stealing regardless of how harmless you believe it may be. Algo's may be easier to write than code, but they still aren't something any normal tom, dick (heh), or harry could do. So I believe there's a certain level of respect here for the builders that needs to be taken into consideration. If you buy a pedal, you own that pedal, you don't own the rights to duplicate anything from it. That's called intellectual property theft.

That being said, I'm wary of this whole thing. In a way it sounds cool. In another way, I know how finicky IC chips can be. So I would not do this without knowing I'm going to commit to the shit for awhile. Those little legs do bend quite easy and that shit sucks.

So for me, I probably won't fuck with this, unless it becomes a case where a builder makes one open source, but it appears there already is some options for that.

[UglyCasanova]

I paid for those sounds, and I'm not sharing them or profiting from them in any way

to be totally pedantic and off the point, if you're being paid for music made using this gear, you totally are.

Well, if I bought and still have the pedals, that doesn't really matter. It's not like there's a disclaimer anywhere on the pedals/boxes/manuals like there are on DVDs and the like. If I buy a CD, I have no ethical issues with transferring certain songs from that CD into iTunes and making a playlist with other songs in it and burning it onto another CD (unless I remix/alter, or simply copy and resell that original CD). Non of that matters anyways, because I'm not making any money on music.

If they really care if I were to use a part of their pedal inside another pedal, they should solder that sucker down or put a block in it.

[Jwar]

Some builders do just that or they void your warranty if you open the shit up because A) they don't want you tinkering around and fucking shit up B) they don't want their designs being stolen.

Now you can justify just about anything if you really want to.

Using these spin chips to make any profit that doesn't go to the builders, IE using it in a youtube video where you accept money from folks (no offense Magpie but I think that's a bit unethical).

I guess the people that need to be asked about this are the builders. So if any are listening, chime in. It's their intellectual property like I said above. I know some builders could care less, where as others will care.

[Jwar]

Also, I'm not trying to be that guy and give you the third degree treatment here. I've worked with a lot of builders and I know how some of them are about their property rights. So I'm just trying to speak in their favor as they took the time to develop these fun toys for us.

[UglyCasanova]

And this is why I buy their pedals^^^^ Have you even read what I've written?

Using these spin chips to make any profit that doesn't go to the builders, IE using it in a youtube video where you accept money from folks

I've never had ads on my channel. When I started getting more subscribers, Youtube asked me if I wanted to have them and I clicked 'no' because having to watch ads before (or, worse; in the middle) of a video pisses me the fuck off.

How much did you think about the time the builders spent developing these fun toys for us when you sold your wataFUZZ for like $800?

[Teej212]

How ethical did you feel when you sold your wataFUZZ for like $800?

I would hardly say playing along with the supply and demand game is unethical, especially compared to potentially profiting off of someone else's hard work through stealing their code (not saying youre doing that, but it certainly seems like the thread is heading towards 'how can I pull the code off my spin chip pedal')

edit - I definitely plan on soldering my chips to the board now and activating write protection now that the cat is out of the bag. Which sucks because I had planned on updating codes and allowing users to swap out their old versions.

[UglyCasanova]

How ethical did you feel when you sold your wataFUZZ for like $800?

I would hardly say playing along with the supply and demand game is unethical, especially compared to potentially profiting off of someone else's hard work through stealing their code (not saying youre doing that but that certainly seems like the thread is heading towards 'how can I pull the code off my spin chip pedal')

I get that. I can only speak for myself, and the bottom line for me is; as long as you''ve bought and still own the pedal (ie, the builder has gotten the profit they wanted from that one unit, and you're not reselling or distributing the code), putting those codes into another pedal for the sake of convenience is perfectly fine. And personally, the 'supply and demand game' (buying a pedal from a builder and flipping it for a $500 profit) is way more unethical than what I just put forth. But that could be my socialism speaking.

[Jwar]

Despite your constant repeated remarks UC, supply and demand profit selling is not unethical. It's called supply and demand for a reason. I profited off of something that anyone else could. There's nothing wrong with that. It's like selling anything. You're willing to pay what you think it's worth.

[UglyCasanova]

'Murica

Cool. I don't agree.

[Jwar]

'Murica

Cool. I don't agree.

It has nothing to do with America bro.

Do you think that the folks selling Sonic Crayon pedals for excessive amounts are being unethical? Or Cornish or Toneczar or any other scarce pedal? No. It's called "if you want it, you'll pay for it or offer something else for it".



This code thing is why I stopped offering artwork that was done by others through Acid Splash Designs. It's not right for me to make a profit off of their artwork since I don't own the rights. So now when someone asked me about an etch, I am very clear about how it needs to happen. I cannot simply copy things. It's not right. I can try to buy the rights, and then sell but if they don't sell rights, it's a no go. I've turned down lots of work because of this and it's why I prefer to work with builders over individuals.

[baremountain]

Using these spin chips to make any profit that doesn't go to the builders, IE using it in a youtube video where you accept money from folks (no offense Magpie but I think that's a bit unethical).

How is this any different from a Knobs video? Maybe Knobs is a bad example bc I imagine he works directly w the manufacturers he demos, but what about any other unsolicited guitar pedal demo, like Pedals & Effects? Are those unethical? They definitely receive ad revenue by showing off the limits of another builder's intellectual property But the builders also benefit because people say "oh shit, that's cool!" and go buy the pedals, so what's the harm in giving a little kickback to the person who took the time to demo the pedal (or in this case, concept)?
It's not much different than rehousing a pedal IMO, you're just taking a movable part from two things you own & switching them. If Simon or UC were to sell this, it'd be hella unethical, but all the attributes of the original manufacturers are being acknowledged & their products are still being advertised the same way they are in any other pedal youtube video, so I see no real harm in this.
People also sell circuit bent shit and upsell pedals and make money off builders' work all the time - and it's not like any of us are even suggesting to do something like that. The thought is why not combine shit to reduce space and increase utility. If you like mixing your shampoo and conditioner together to save space, and you paid for both, then it's not really that bad to rehouse the conditioner into the shampoo bottle you paid for. Now if you're going around selling this as a new product & don't acknowledge that you've used somone else's base materials, that's not very ethical.
I think all of us care about the builders we like being paid at the end of the day, and none of us are goign to willingly sabotage them. I, for one, am regretting selling my Super Radical now

[Jwar]

Also re-copy-write laws. There are ways to alter images and it to be ok.

[D.o.S.]

Oh hey, ethics in the secondary market. Haven't seen you around in weeks.

Obviously people fall on different ends of the spectrum here -- I don't sell shit at an inflated price, but I also don't sell things to people who rub me the wrong way, which is arguably just as "unfair" -- but I do think there's a bit of a difference in turning every spin chip pedal into the Console.

Of course, that's sort of something you open yourself up to when you're using the Spin Chip, which is why we had such an interesting discussion about it the first time it came up.

For what it's worth, I'm a big believer in intellectual property. I also happen to think that UC's experiment is cool as hell, but I do think that the logical endpoint has to be something like what Teeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeej has articulated: once people know they can do this with spin chips, it's going to be just like the first wave of boutique cloning.

[baremountain]

I profited off of something that anyone else could.

Anyone with that pedal. And anyone with 2 spin chip pedals could theoretically profit off copying code from the chips.
(not arguing for it, but just pointing out a hole in your argument)