Why SoundFonts Ought To Be Free Like Wikipedia
The “functional works” issue has come up on the BLAG list regarding “soundfonts.” Here’s a fuller version of my post there:
Its important to start this discussion by framing it properly: this is about social policy, not technical detail. Most people are not used to thinking about issues of social policy, since we are trained for “problem solving” instead - myself included, for sure.
An example of this “problem solving” mentality often surfaces in this discussion, where things focus on formats or if things are digitised. But considering just text, be it printed on paper or digital ‘plain text’ or more in complex digital formats, there are three kinds of texts with regard to their roles in society and appropriate social policies.
First, words of aesthetics: A compilation of stories need not be modifiable.
Second, words of testimony: A compilation of political manifestos need not be modifiable.
Third, words of explanation: A compilation of how-tos needs to be modifiable, because it will have “bugs” - it will have things missing, or incorrect, and need updating. If the users of this “functional information” have to ask permission to make these changes, or are in other ways forbidden from making them, they are facing a tyrant. Guess where that leads :-)
Words of testimony or aesthetics are read, but not used.
Novels are entertaining, and if the audience feels things are missing, or incorrect, or need updating, it is not a problem if they have to wait a while before rewriting parts; we have a richer culture if we allow artists to control their works for a time, and then allow other artists to remix works after that.
Manifestos are persuading, but if the audience feels things are missing, or incorrect, or need updating, it is a problem if they rewrite parts - because that will misrepresent and misattribute the original authors; we have a richer culture if we write our own opinions from scratch.
Explanations are informing, and if the audience feels things are missing, or incorrect, or need updating, it is a problem if they can’t do that because it holds up progress; we have a richer culture if we “stand on the shoulders of giants.”
What are SoundFonts?
SoundFonts are collections of very short recordings of sounds that are arranged into musical compositions; you can play a composition using a well-keyed soundfont and it sounds harmonious, then play it again with a off-keyed soundfont and it sounds cacophonous. People need to change the sounds in a soundfont in order to render compositions correctly; akin to the piano tuner who works on physical pianos.
Fonts are digital versions of type designs; the same type design can be in metal, wood, or bitstreams. They are collections of very small shapes that are recognised as letters and are intended to be arranged into arbitary words; you can display a text using a well-spaced type design and it reads easily, then display it again with a poorly spaced type design and it reads poorly. People need to change the type designs they use because they can improve or inhibit reading in different contexts; font software adds an additional motivation for having free type designs, since fonts can have bugs that need fixing like other kinds of software (separate from the issue of the type’s design.)
The license for a soundfont that is part of BLAG permits converting to other formats, which is also an issue for font software. But this is separate to the issue of changing the sounds themselves, like changing the type design versus converting the format of the curves from cubic Type 1 beziers to quadratic TrueType beziers.
I think the SoundFont ought to be removed from BLAG, just like non-modifiable fonts ought to be removed.
The Why SoundFonts Ought To Be Free Like Wikipedia by David Crossland, except the quotations and unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Comments
Leave a Reply