Unfortunately the content is not open source. According to a manual in one of the editions, all rights were reserved on the software coding, images, photographs, text, video, audio and music to a company named Graphix Zone.

I'm interested to hear more about what you're making though.

scrubdadishes said:

Hi all I'm working on a lil prince related project and was wondering if anyone knows if I am allowed to use samples he provided in the interactive CDROM game in my own project? Were the sound sample files in the game open source for public use? Any info much appreciated

.

Are we a copyright lawyer?

Did you specify how long your samples are?

Or whether you contacted the Estate?

Or how much $$ you wish to spend to clear those samples?

.

No, I am not at all familiar with Us coptight law but commen sense leads to those questions.

There might be fair use for short samples; if not you'll have to pay anyway to be `legal`.

Yes, copyright and intellectual property are fictitious castles that need protection.

Even beyond the death of the creator.

.

Compare that to when I create something tangible.

Then I die.

And someone creates copies or derivatives of that work.

Will my Estate be compensated?

scrubdadishes said:

Hi all I'm working on a lil prince related project and was wondering if anyone knows if I am allowed to use samples he provided in the interactive CDROM game in my own project? Were the sound sample files in the game open source for public use? Any info much appreciated

.

That's why lawyers exist. Ask one of them.

I agree with all the posters say. This is protected by copyright. If you use it without permission you will probably get sued.

by my understanding of fair use: you can use short samples for review, commentary, or Educational Purposes. Or for private use... once it crosses into commercial use you are in violation.

*I have had a good laugh when people would post songs on YT and put up a fair use disclaimer that is totally bogus.

You can't use someone else's work without paying for it. Period. It's better to just be original and create your own stuff than use someone else's work.

TrivialPursuit said:

You can't use someone else's work without paying for it. Period. It's better to just be original and create your own stuff than use someone else's work.

TrivialPursuit said:

You can't use someone else's work without paying for it. Period. It's better to just be original and create your own stuff than use someone else's work.

.

Given that Interactive is a commercial CD-Rom comprised mainly of material by a major recording artist, I grant that the question of it's copyright status was a bit redundant.

.

Having said that, with all due respect “You can't use someone else's work without paying for it. Period.” is simply not true. In Scrubdadishes defence, they did ask if the material was open source. To my knowledge the concept of open source is relatively recent (only becoming popular within the last decade or so), and wasn’t really a thing in the mid 90s when CD-Roms became popular. I could be wrong.

.

“It's better to just be original and create your own stuff than use someone else's work.” This isn’t true either, not in all cases. Lots of fantastic work has spawned from fans and admirers working on other people’s IPs, better than the originals in some cases. What about DJ remixes? Ever heard Jason Nevins ‘It’s Like That’ remix? What about fan films? Ever watched Dirty Laundry? What about fan made remasters, or any type of fan projects?

.

I don’t know what your making Scrubdadishes, but whatever it is I encourage you to carry on. Even if you can’t release it publicly, you can still use it for your own pleasure or a proof of concept. Best of luck in your endeavours.