Forum

Please consider registering
guest

Log In

Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
Alternative name for Lola
Mar 11 2004
09:30
andromeda
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 188
Member Since:
Feb 27 2004
Offline

I seem to remember reading in the licence agreement for Lola that if you produce a commercial recording using Vocaloid, you may do this so long as you do not say that the vocals were produced by Vocaloid. If you do, you must pay an extra licence fee. So I thought, if I were to create a song with Lola as lead vocal, who would I credit as the vocalist. I could, of course, just make up a ficticious name. I decided the best way would be to use an anagram of “Vocaloid Lola”. The best I have come up with so far is
CALLI DA OVOLO,
LILAC ODOLOVA and
OLIVA COLLADO
They all sound rather exotic and slightly Italian!
Any better suggestions for Lola, Leon or Miriam?
Cheers <img class=” />
Chris

Mar 11 2004
15:14
edstratton
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
Feb 5 2004
Offline

[quote:1mjzf1bl]I seem to remember reading in the licence agreement for Lola that if you produce a commercial recording using Vocaloid, you may do this so long as you do not say that the vocals were produced by Vocaloid. If you do, you must pay an extra licence fee.[/quote:1mjzf1bl]

That is not actually correct. The situation where an additional licence needs to be negotiated is where you are releasing a record with LOLA as the publicised “Artist” or some other fictitious name and are specifically and deliberately advertising the fact that this is a Virtual Artist. In other words you are telling the press and public that there is no human Artist whatsoever (for example you might wish to do this as a selling point). In this situation Zero-G regards Vocaloid LOLA as being at least partially the Artist. So if you openly publicise that YOU are the artist it’s OK (or that the artist is “YOU featuring Vocaloid LOLA” – that is also OK) and you don’t need an additional license. The test is when a record reviewer asks “Who is the artist on this record?” and you say “It’s a machine, a virtual pop star, called Vocaloid LOLA” or something along those lines. In that case, you need to negotiate an additional license agreement with Zero-G. Whereas if the answer was “Its XXXX FEATURING Vocaloid LOLA” where XXXX is any human, then you are already licensed to do that. Of course, once LOLA has been a publicised virtual pop star/artist once, it may well be less attractive for another user to try to make her their virtual artist as well.

Mar 11 2004
15:50
quetzalcoatl
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 173
Member Since:
Feb 26 2004
Offline

Wouldn’t the publicity and extra sales generated for Vocaloid, if a hit record publicised Vocaloid Lola be great for you? What should be negociated is a deal where Zero-G pays the artist! You’ve got this upside down.

Well, convince me…….

Mar 11 2004
16:35
andromeda
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 188
Member Since:
Feb 27 2004
Offline

Isn’t that what I said, Ed. If I say the artist is Lola I have to pay you extra, if I say it’s Calli Da Ovolo I don’t???? :?
Chris
PS You didn’t think up an anagram <img class=” />

Mar 12 2004
08:18
edstratton
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
Feb 5 2004
Offline

[quote:10uvu29y]Wouldn’t the publicity and extra sales generated for Vocaloid, if a hit record publicised Vocaloid Lola be great for you? What should be negociated is a deal where Zero-G pays the artist! You’ve got this upside down.[/quote:10uvu29y]

The thing is, I have personally always believed that there will be hit record(s) with either LOLA or LEON or both as lead singers, and that therefore they could be the publicised Artist if that is what the user wants. Of course this would indeed generate massive interest in the products but this was always going to happen as far as I personally believe. Given this, I felt that there should be an ability to exercise some control over how these new ‘pop stars’ go about their virtual lives. Here’s an example: if there was a massive hit LOLA record (LOLA being the only publicised Artist) that was full of beauty and artistry and then some other user made her release a disgusting degrading obscene record (LOLA again being the only publicised Artist) that might not be such a good thing. I felt that it should at least be possible at Zero-G’s discretion to cause the second user give her a different Artist name…
I realize this could spark a long debate so I better warn you now that I don’t have time to look at this forum as often as I would like, so I may not be able to take much more part in it!!

[quote:10uvu29y]Isn’t that what I said, Ed. If I say the artist is Lola I have to pay you extra, if I say it’s Calli Da Ovolo I don’t???? Chris. PS You didn’t think up an anagram[/quote:10uvu29y]

Well yes you did say that, you are right. I just wanted to make sure there was no confusion about what the User License means.

As regards the anagram, well COOL DIVA is the best anagram of VOCALOID that I know, and LOLA could certainly be one in the right hands! Cool Diva Olla? Hmmmm…

Mar 12 2004
08:22
edstratton
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
Feb 5 2004
Offline

Oh and by the way, I think “Callia D’Avolo” rolls off the tongue more smoothly than “Calli Da Avolo”. Just a thought. :)

Mar 22 2004
20:51
robotarchie
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 223
Member Since:
Feb 27 2004
Offline

Just a few fuzzy thoughts, but if a Vocaloid is a licenced program to play back a sample library, then why does it need a name like Lola or Leon and then talk of “moral” issues arisng from their use/misuse. It’s childish I know but I always seem to try out the rude words first with these sort of things :D and found that the library was a bit low on certain well known globally acknowledged expressions. It’s a little odd to be thinking about the reputations of source voices given that we don’t know who these people actually ARE or what their moral character is actually like? I can detect that Vocaloid Miriam is being treated (and marketed?) more as a “real” person given that she’s a famous singer, and therefore carries a virtual prestige that’s worth more money. But is the Vocaloid library REALLY HER or is it just a collection of snippets of someone who made a large number of short gutteral noises into a sampler of a day? I’m beginning to think that BB King should pay a licence to Gibson for crediting on records and then re-naming his guitar “Lucille” when it’s officially a Gibson Model 335… saucy cheek! Anyway, just having fun with pedantics, me.

Mar 23 2004
00:51
gray
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 304
Member Since:
Feb 27 2004
Offline

Gutteral noises. LOL. Very good description I think

Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 108

Currently Online:
2 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

gray: 304

robotarchie: 223

andromeda: 188

quetzalcoatl: 173

Giuseppe: 167

Luka Mitutoyo: 147

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1

Members: 7988

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 5

Forums: 27

Topics: 764

Posts: 3555

Newest Members: kprem, yang7764, lisajim, gameace, Sunnydoot, Anildoot

Administrators: administrator: 268