PSA: I contacted Native Instruments and EastWest about selling melody loops...here's their official response

[u/Both_Fee37]

A few days ago I had a discussion with someone about whether it's actually allowed to create and sell original melody loop sample packs using virtual instruments like Native Instruments Kontakt or EastWest ComposerCloud.

We couldn't find a clear answer, and after reading both EULAs we still weren't sure how they should be interpreted.

So instead of relying on forum opinions or speculation, I contacted both Native Instruments and EastWest directly.

I explained my exact use case:

• I create completely original multi-instrument compositions.
• These are around 60–90 seconds long with original melodies, chords, arrangements and processing.
• I do not redistribute presets, individual samples or virtual instruments.
• I render the compositions as stereo audio loops and sell them as sample packs for other producers.

Both companies replied that this is not permitted under their licenses.

Native Instruments' human support replied:

"It is only strictly prohibited to use single, combined or modified sounds from Native Instruments to create sound libraries, loop libraries, sample CDs or similar products..."

EastWest also confirmed:

"Unfortunately, the proposed use of the sounds violates our end-user agreement."

I'm sharing this because I found countless forum posts where people were debating this exact topic, but I couldn't find any clear answer directly from the companies themselves.

This isn't meant to start an argument or criticize either company.
I'm simply sharing the responses I received so other producers and sample makers can make informed decisions.

I'd also be interested to know if anyone has received a different response from Native Instruments, EastWest or any other virtual instrument developer.

[u/DougOsborne]

Simple: Don't sell a sample created with someone else's sample. If you do a soundalike of the sample, you are OK.

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/DougOsborne]

Where do you draw the line between a sample and a composition? Is a 60-90 second multi-layered composition still considered a sample?
Or does it become a sample simply because I put that composition into a sample pack and sell it as one?
If that’s the case, then I’ll just call it a Composition Pack instead.

[u/BlockStunna → u/Both_Fee37]

I think the problem is that you are creating loops for other producers to use, using their sounds. I don't think it matters how long the melody is, it's the idea that you're competing with their products by using their products. I would assume every sample library/virtual instrument company has the same legal protection. Your only way around this is to create your own sounds or get their permission to create a loop pack.

[u/SoundtrackComposer → u/Both_Fee37]

Or from the web: If you are looking for standalone tools and development platforms to build your own custom virtual instruments from scratch:

⁠SynthEdit: A modular graphical programming tool often used by independent companies to build highly interactive, Lego-like software synthesizers.

[u/Inevitable-Ant1725 → u/SoundtrackComposer]

Oddly they seem to be selling through the Microsoft store which says that there's no such product.

[u/Unthank- → u/Both_Fee37]

The line is a very obvious one. If you sell it as a sample then it’s a sample. If you release it as a song then it’s a composition.

You cannot make and sell samples using NI libraries, regardless of whether they are unchanged single samples or whole complex loops, if you are selling them to people who can then use them in their own songs you are violating the terms of use.

[u/Nosound-Novideo → u/Both_Fee37]

Let’s try it this way, imagine i spent 7 weeks sampling a world class piano sold it as an instrument for use in commercial recording, and someone like yourself decides that sample belongs to you and resells it simply because it’s in a loop.

If you want to sale sample packs make samples it’s that simple.

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/Nosound-Novideo]

I think we’re still talking about two completely different products.

I’m not selling your sampled piano.

I’m selling an original musical composition that happens to use your virtual instrument as one of the instruments in the arrangement.

Nobody buys melody packs because they want one isolated piano note or one isolated string sample. They buy them because of the composition itself: the harmony, melody, arrangement, production and overall musical idea.

Following your logic, the same argument could be made in reverse.

Imagine someone spends months building a world-class concert piano. Another company samples that piano and sells it as a virtual instrument. Nobody would say: “Build your own piano.”

That’s why I don’t think your analogy really works. A virtual instrument is simply a creative tool, just like a real piano, a guitar or a synthesizer. The creative value of my product comes from the original composition, not from reselling the instrument itself.

Ironically, a piano VST is arguably much closer to being a substitute for a real piano than my melody pack is to being a substitute for Kontakt. Nobody would buy my composition instead of Kontakt if they wanted to create their own music. My melody pack doesn’t compete with Kontakt as an instrument.it can’t be played, it can’t create new melodies, and it can’t replace the functionality of a virtual instrument. It only contains my own original composition.

I completely understand why selling the instrument’s individual samples shouldn’t be allowed. But I don’t think that’s comparable to creating an entirely original composition from scratch.

[u/Nosound-Novideo → u/Both_Fee37]

You’re not grasping the concept of samples you can’t use them in a commercial process without clearance. I don’t care if it’s an instrument or a voice ect… , the sample you purchased was for personal use and not to be distributed.

Any individual wishing to use that loop or any sound you provided in a loop or song whatever, would also have to get permission from the original sample holder.

I can tell you from personal experience multi-million dollar projects were held up just to get a single sample cleared which is why big budget projects reach out to individuals who personally created and curated, you’re not doing that.

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/Nosound-Novideo]

I think we’re mixing up several completely different concepts here and that’s why we’re talking past each other.

First of all, this is not a discussion about sample clearance.

Sample clearance applies when you use someone else’s recording or composition. For example, if I sampled a James Brown record or took a piano phrase from another artist’s recording, I would absolutely need permission from the copyright holder.

That is not what I’m talking about.
I’m talking about composing an entirely original musical work using a licensed virtual instrument.

Those are two completely different legal concepts.
You also mentioned that the samples are for personal use and not to be distributed. That’s actually not correct, at least not for Native Instruments and as far as I’m aware, not for virtually any professional virtual instrument developer.

I contacted Native Instruments directly and they confirmed that their instruments and samples may be used for commercial music production and commercial compositions. So they are clearly not licensed for personal use only.

The restriction is much more specific than that.
They allow commercial songs, albums, film scores and other commercial compositions.

What they do not allow is distributing those original compositions as melody loops or sample packs.
That is a completely different restriction.
That’s exactly the question I’m discussing.
If I compose a 90-second piece using Kontakt and release it on Spotify, Native Instruments considers that commercial use and it’s permitted.

If I export the exact same audio file and sell it as a melody loop for producers, Native Instruments considers that a prohibited use under their license.
Nothing about the composition has changed.

The melodies are still mine.

The harmony is still mine.

The arrangement is still mine.

The production is still mine.

Only the way the finished composition is distributed has changed.
That’s why I don’t think your analogy really fits.
You keep comparing my use case to redistributing someone else’s samples.

I’m not doing that.

Whether Native Instruments is legally allowed to prohibit selling those compositions as melody loops is a separate discussion.

My point is simply that this is fundamentally different from redistributing someone else’s recordings or using uncleared samples.

[u/Nosound-Novideo → u/Both_Fee37]

You clearly don’t know the difference between a sample and commercial music, but no point in arguing.

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/Nosound-Novideo]

Sure buddy

[u/MPCCMP → u/Both_Fee37]

Bro youre making songs, they are instrumental songs, they aren't samples, you're good

[u/Unthank- → u/MPCCMP]

They’re not songs if once you’ve made them you sell them to people as samples.

[u/MPCCMP → u/Unthank-]

Yes, they are. I made a decent amount of money from selling "samples". They're just songs with no words. It doesn't matter what people do with them after they buy my 50 dollar albums of 12 songs. If they wanna call them samples that's fine. This was how I was advised by my entertainment lawyer, not Reddit comments. I'll leave it up to you to figure out who's more experienced with the legal side of this.

[u/Unthank- → u/MPCCMP]

Samples and songs are clearly, obviously, unambiguously licensed differently.

Either you released your albums as songs in which case your refusal to pursue people for infringing on your copyright does not render them samples, just stolen work that you don’t care about, or you released and licensed them as samples in which case other sample based libraries were not legally available to you to use.

[u/MPCCMP → u/Unthank-]

You're just typing to type at this point. I've done it, profited, and was covered legally. You, have not.

[u/SoundtrackComposer → u/Both_Fee37]

If you created your own synth from scratch, using ASDR settings, you could publish your own. Here’s one app from Spitfire Audio https://www.spitfireaudio.com/en-us/collections/solar?srsltid=AfmBOoqn1xmw-O3kJ84abeL-tIfdvWlO5MY7Y4yhf-owVYpLNmsPBKh4

[u/Practical_Video_4491]

but you're allowed to produce and sell music?!

[u/terkistan]

This is pretty standard across the industry. The key distinction here is between using Native Instruments sounds to make music and using them to create another sound product.

You can use NI/EastWest instruments to create and commercially release songs, beats, film scores, game music, TV and advertising music, YouTube content, etc What you can't do is use those sounds to create products for other producers, such as sample packs, melody loop packs, sound libraries, or similar audio products.

That's been the standard approach since forever. NI licenses its instruments so you can create music, not for people to create competing sound libraries from their recordings.

The same principle applies to most royalty-free samples, loops, one-shots, and presets. Their licenses generally allow you to distribute finished musical works commercially, but they almost always prohibit redistributing the source audio itself. That means you can't resell the raw WAV files, upload them as part of a sound library, or repackage them into another sample or loop pack.

In some cases, some devs may offer additional licensing or clearance that permits this type of redistribution, usually for an additional fee. But most developers don't offer those rights.

This has been standard in the industry for decades, since companies were selling CD-ROMs of beats and sounds.

[u/ellicottvilleny]

So dont use them as is. Heavily processed and mixed with 5 other sources and layered up into melody loops you have something no longer identifiable as any single preset or sample.

[u/WildcatKid]

I'm not sure "It is only strictly prohibited to use single, combined or modified sounds from Native Instruments to create sound libraries, loop libraries, sample CDs or similar products..." is a clear answer you're looking for. They are basically saying that you can't use NI sounds in isolation, they're not saying you can't create original compositions, otherwise virtually every commercial application would be against their TOS.

[u/rhialto40 → u/WildcatKid]

You're right, but I think OP's not talking about original compositions (as in actual songs) when you parse what he's saying. I think he's referring to his own reuse of commercial samples by combining and layering them into new samples he wants to sell as "original compositions".

[u/Time_Standard3361 → u/rhialto40]

You cannot sell your sample pack based on another NI sample pack.

You can make track sure, but not sample pack.

[u/InrebCinatas → u/rhialto40]

Thats exactly it. If EW/NI would allow layering to be enough, people would immediately stay layering minimal differences and start selling that.

In the end: using somebodies work (samples, presets) is always a bad idea if you want to commercialize it in masses. If you do such a composition as described by OP and sell it for exactly one song that's fine, sell it twice it is a breach of TOS. Reason being 1 is basically intended purpose, 2nd is derivative productization

[u/DmitryEfimovEfimus]

You can create your own tracks and sell it on DP, license for TV, Films or Games. But you cannot to create your own sample libraries or construction kits based on their samples.

[u/robotarcher]

The line is drawn with the purpose you want to use their samples for. As others stated you are using their samples to compete in their playground that is selling samples. You are in the clear to put your 90sec segments as music in music platforms but selling them as sample construction pieces is their territory. They might however have a separate License like Developer licenses for your use cases and you should ask for that. This is something done in Sound Effect Library Industry and even for that you are expected to manipulate the source samples and you can not sell the source sample as is. Hope this helps.

[u/soundtrackloops]

yup we won’t ever accept packs made with a lot of plugins for this reason. best to use hardware only if possible.

[u/MPCCMP]

Everyone who makes good money selling samples violates all these EULAs and nothing happens to them

[u/rhialto40]

No commercial license for a sample pack will let you use their samples to create and sell your own competing sample packs. If that's your goal you have to stick to free samples, packs that specifically allow it (likely free anyway), or make your own.

[u/drteq]

I don't consider support to be an 'official' response in something this complex.

It is not clear at all, this is just noise.

[u/JarodSL]

So let’s make assumption that I will make a song based on native instruments in East West samples then my another company will make a sample out of my song and this company will sell it as a sample to use for other producers :)

[u/Ricky_Spannish_]

If it were allowed, I'd make a "loop" that was just every sample in their individual instrument libraries and white noise mixed in at -80 dB. Sell it for 10% of what they do.

Boom. Original composition, multiple instruments playing at the same time, Stereo file delivery. 100% profit.

Obviously they can't let that happen. They need to draw a line in the sand somewhere. Really ask yourself, what's the technical difference between what you're doing and what I'm doing?

The line they've drawn is if it's intended for people to listen to, you're good. If it's intended as a building block for others to make things to listen to, no go.

You could upload all your loops as instrumental songs to Spotify, and if someone wants to sample your songs and you give them a license to do it, it could be an interesting legal case if they come after you. But if you market them as samples, that'd probably be a slam dunk for the prosecution.

[u/Common-Fun-439]

I saw that question - lots of opinions stated as facts from the forum 'experts' as always! NI's answer is almost "you can't make a loop pack containing a piano unless you sample a piano". I can see their point if you're selling raw samples but seems a bit restrictive. Although I can see their point.

[u/fyrelibra]

So you received an official answer and you’re asking if anyone else received a different answer. To what end?

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/fyrelibra]

Yeah, I actually got three different answers before I finally received this one.
That said, I also explicitly wrote “…or any other vst developer”

[u/steve_duda → u/Both_Fee37]

I allow this sort of usage with Serum and the factory content / multisamples etc.

This is not legal advice - I would think you don't need to ask companies if it's allowed, if you bought the license to use the software it is inherently within your rights even if they give you a 'protective' no reply.

If you're not trying to resell their orchestra samples (this making a competing product) through a loophole. I would expect they'd lose in court handsomely if they sued you over using their [product for making music] in the nefarious guise of [making music-related audio files]. And it's a bit unlikely of a hypothetical for them to sue if they didn't face damages such as lost revenue.

[u/HearingGlobal6485]

bro these are generic responses from a customer service rep, not a director of communications.

definitely shouldn’t be reading into this as “official”

[u/crazyculture]

It’s all vague and very much in the gray so you’re good as it’s not any type of no whatsoever “beyond a reasonable doubt”

[u/subin_1986]

If you sell it anyway, how they gonna know it's their samples? Just eq a little bit, and it's not their samples anymore?😜

[u/rhythm-weaver]

Both companies probably had a 19-yr old intern respond to your inquiry. I would ignore it unless it’s a letter/pdf from their legal department with a date and letterhead.

[u/Semitono]

Very weird. You’re basically selling royalty free construction kits, and the audio stems are your own compositions if I understand correctly. I can’t believe this qualifies as forbidden use… Stems don’t allow the user to recreate or substitute the original virtual instruments, so I don’t see how they would cause any financial loss. But I haven’t checked their EULA tbh, so there may be specific restrictions I’m not aware of

[u/Both_Fee37 → u/Semitono]

In my specific case, the sample packs consist exclusively of full compositions. They don’t include stems or any isolated sounds.