Do we OWN our project files?

In short. In case I will use the information from CWP file, in particular to open CWP files in Reaper, is that going to be legal?
 
In details.
We do NOT OWN CW software nor any part of it. And we are not allowed to RE/modify/etc. any bundled with Sonar code. That is in EULA and there is no questions about that part.
 
But WE OWN WAVS, MIDI, FLAC and other media files which Sonar produce. At the end, that is why we have payed for the license to use Sonar (plug-ins, etc). So we can do whatever we like with these files. We can use them in other DAWs, we can split them into bits, modify, sell, etc.
 
CWP files are also "media" files. They have the information how we have named out tracks, fade-in/fade-outs, automations, which settings we was using for the project and plug-ins, MIDI data, etc.
CWP files do not contain any CODE (at least it looks so).
CWP files are not "encrypted" (breaking any encryption is illegal).
 
But...
At least some "presets" from CW contain IP, as was mentioned in the forum before (f.e. FX chains from Craig).
There are many precedences that formats can be "protected" by something, f.e. mp3 not so long time ago.
 
So far, by deep Googling, I came to the conclusion that at least in Europe (and I am in Europe) file formats can not be patented. Restrictions can be on the DATA usage, but data in my case are solely made by users (using Sonar) directly or by Sonar on behalf of users. Restrictions can be on algorithms for using the data (like with mp3), but it seems like not the case with data in question.
 
But I am not a lawyer. In case someone has opinions (better with references...), please let me know.
 
As already discussed in several other threads, when a program development is stopped, people start to think about data preservation. While we can save WAVs and MIDI, there is a bit more information in our projects.

More concerned about if can I open a Sonar Project in a couple of years so I can at the very least do an export. I don't want to see it deactivated.

I think it's a good idea also to save midi files. Also, make sure to save your vsti configurations, so you can load them into your project in another DAW.  If you save wave, midi and vsti's, you will pretty much have your project as it was in Sonar. At least I think this is true. the more knowledgeable folks here will correct me if I'm wrong.

First of all, thanks for the answers.
 

Cactus Music
Hate to say this way, not meaning to sound nasty,, just a gut reaction,,  but your wasting a lot of brain cells worrying about nothing.

I know But that is quite some fun to refresh my old RE skills...
 

TheSteven
But I don't get the reason for your post - it doesn't  much matter unless you can open them in other DAWs.

Let say I am quite close to be able open them in other DAW...
 

Owning the files is not the same thing as owning the format which is probably copyrighted i.e. owning your own project files doesn't mean that Cakewalk is going to or is obligated to make the specification available.
 
The concept that some people hold about 'abandonware' has no legal standing - just because something is no longer sold or published doesn't mean it becomes public domain or negate the owner's rights (not considering copyright expiration dates).

The specification can be "deducted". I am not requesting anything from Cakewalk. Also I do not try to intrude Sonar. The file structure is probably copyrighted, but so are books and scores. That does not prevent you to read them. There there can be other implications for contained information use  (f.e. scores do not give you the right to play that music without extra fees), but the information in CWP is as yours as WAVs and MIDIs.
 

sharke
I'm gonna presume that you're looking into ways of harvesting the data from the CWP files so that you can recreate projects in Reaper? In other words, you're thinking about reverse engineering them? 

This.
 

I guess it depends on whether CWP is a proprietary format or an open format? I suspect it's a proprietary format, and the details of it are unpublished. But while that might mean Cakewalk (or Gibson or whomever) could theoretically launch a legal challenge against you, I think there are probably enough legal precedents established that they wouldn't bother. In other words, the courts would probably deem it "fair use." 

Reading (more cryptic then CWP and for me in "foreign" language) courts outcomes, that is how I have interpreted them
 

Would I release a program which converted CWP files into Reaper files, and charge money for it? Probably not. But I'm sure if you released a free app to convert the files, nobody would bother you.

Probably I will release the result as not open source donationware. But I have not decided yet.
Related project (AATranslator) is far from "free".
 

bitflipper
Oh, and if you're thinking of reverse-engineering the project files, forget it. I've tried, with only limited success. There have been many different versions of the file format over the years, details hidden from users but that make it hard to figure out what's what in there.

I normally try to avoid steeling peoples time by just creating a buzz... The format is not obvious at first, but once you understand its logic, it is not so difficult to extract the information. Also X+Platinum is what I target, any interface related parts are not relevant and I do not think the core had many changes, Platinum files till some degree can be opened in older versions.
 

sharke
Automation envelopes. Unfortunately that's a huge part of the mix you can't export.

FX chains, synth settings. Possible to save in each VST separately and reconstruct after, but boring and error prone. And many other details which can take time to put back in place. All that can be avoided in case "just open" can work.
Sure there are many things which can not be converted, ProChannel, RegionFX, not sure about step sequencer, not sure about AudioSnap.
 

I suspect that even if there is strictly speaking some legal fine print somewhere in the EULA to discourage tinkering with the project files to work out a way to extract meaningful information from them, it's on pretty thin legal ground. If you create a piece of software that doesn't actually alter any Sonar code, that doesn't even alter the CWP file, just reads it (which we do, legally, every time we open one in Sonar) and outputs another file that can be opened in another DAW, what have you done? You haven't altered any file the EULA prohibits you from altering. And the code you write is yours, not theirs. 
 
If you were using tons of Cakewalk branding to piggyback off of their marketing in order to sell shedloads of a commercial product, then there would be a case to be made against you, but I think it's pretty clear that's neither the reality nor the intention of what you're doing.  
 
So do we 'own' our project files? That's an interesting question and while I'm not a legal expert, I suspect a strong case could be made that we do, at least substantially. As you touch on above, what about a WAV file or an MP3 that I create of my own composition... I don't own the file format, but I definitely *do* own the intellectual property contained in the file; even if extracting that information requires software that I do not own the rights to. If ownership of the file format implied ownership or legal rights pertaining to the contents, the file format owner could make a claim on all IP of anything stored in that format. What if I store it in multiple formats? Who owns it then?
 
If I sell you a bottle, I cannot then claim that anything you put in that bottle is mine. If I try to put that in the EULA of the bottle which you agree to by using it, and then try to defend that right in court, how do you think it will go? At the end of the day, we *have* to own the rights to the contents of our media files, regardless of who created or who owns the file format, because otherwise the entire edifice of copyright and IP law is rendered meaningless. 
 

azslow3
The specification can be "deducted".

 
At the risk of being pedantic, the word you're looking for here is 'deduced'... 'deducted' means something a little different. 

your translator app sits outside sonar, and so long as its use requires a licensed sonar to be installed i reckon you're good to go, please do studio one translator first!
(how do apps like chicken translator handle this stuff?)

subtlearts
If I sell you a bottle, I cannot then claim that anything you put in that bottle is mine. If I try to put that in the EULA of the bottle which you agree to by using it, and then try to defend that right in court, how do you think it will go? At the end of the day, we *have* to own the rights to the contents of our media files, regardless of who created or who owns the file format, because otherwise the entire edifice of copyright and IP law is rendered meaningless. 

I have not found any statements about any output files in CW EULA. But ...
 

azslow3
The specification can be "deducted".

At the risk of being pedantic, the word you're looking for here is 'deduced'... 'deducted' means something a little different.

You are correct about my knowledges in (not computer) languages
 
Ownership and other laws, patents are copyrights not always follow common logic. Remember drying a cat in microwave, "too hot coffee", etc.
And in the software world, patents for mouse double-clicking, representing any process by an icon on computer screen, etc.
For you bottle example... there was Flash format with fancy EULA.

mettelus
Bottom line to legal action is that a company is only going to pursue damage mitigation or loss of revenue (neither of which apply). If they cannot get a dime from you (if you don't sell it, there is no claim against you) and you are not damaging their product (which they already publicly bailed on), then they are not going to spend millions in legal fees to recoup nothing. Also in such a setting, a company who has proven no corporate ethics with conduct, you would come off like a saint for providing a free service to benefit customers who were abandoned.

A good point.

Interesting question azslow3. At first didn't think much of it, but once I understood what your really asking...Good point.
 
As some here have stated, the new digital world we live in the laws have not kept up. And once you move out into the international world, it gets even more complicated.
 
I side with the "you own your IP no matter what container is holding it" camp. And I believe that fair use would come into play.
 
But in the end, it would take a court of law to make all this speculation legal and binding.

Ya sorry for my first answer, I should have realized who was asking it and why. Now I see and it is worth wasting brain cells on.. a fare few too. 
 
At worst if your worried about being busted, stay underground. There already some of that happening here that I'm sworn to secrecy about so cannot even hint. We have a huge member list. 
 
Or another idea might be PM Noel and just ask him what he thinks. They might say it's a great idea thank you.
 

I see. Thanks that helps. My use of Sonar is not very deep, so I don't have these issues. Funny, I compose for full orchestra, with many instruments, but it's all midi and the FX are quite basic. Just interested in halfway decent mockups, really. But most folks are doing audio, or audio plus midi, and are much deeper into the software than I ever go. So a handful of instruments can be way more complex than what I do with an entire orchestra.
 
That's what is so amazing about Sonar. We can all do what we need to do with it. Such a deep, versatile program. How can they pull the plug on it? There has to be a way to save it.