6 years, 2 months ago
I believe this was replied by both me and Xavier Serra, MTG's director. Freesound will never charge for content. In the future we *might* charge for other things, but we will never charge for content. I.e. you will always be able to use freesound, download and upload sounds, for free.
One example of commercial usage could be: if we make some kind of way where companies can access Freesound's content via an API, we might charge for commercial usage of this API. For example, say that there would be a freesound browser inside Cubase, we might charge Seinberg for allowing this. This is just an example so you understand, not a real example!
Both Xavier and me firmly believe that charging for content is an archaic way of thinking about media that will soon go the way of the dinosaurs.
Bram, I am assured by that answer. Given that soundsnap have now adopted the afor mencioned model, does Bram and the rest of the community not think as I do that people record sounds not because they expect money, but rather because they enjoy it and want other people to enjoy their sounds?Does Bram or the rest of the community also share my opinion that the way to keep a library thriving is to keep the community going not cut it back, which is their model? And in the days of recession that we live in now, when people's jobs are constantly under threat, and hence where people are raning in what savings they have, in that case, buying sounds will be the last thing on people's minds. And that is why, especially with the additional http upload option, I think sites like ours will prosper, and sites like soundsnap and other cell sites will not. I know that some members of this site are also members of soundsnap, so I would be interested in their response to my arguments.
Happy 2009 to everyone.