Top
Best
New

Posted by jmpman 1 day ago

Ask HN: Fable hacked my piano, can I release the results?

I have a self playing piano, using a system called PianoDisc Protigy. They have an online store which sells music for their system, from various modern artists along with classics such as Bach and Beethoven. Last night I saw they had released some music from Eric Satre, a 19th century French composer, which I bought. Curious if I could have just used AI to create these files, I began experimenting with Astra and Fable. Feeding the output of one into the other to critique. After an hour of LLM discussion of Rubato and fermata, solenoid response times and proper sustain pedal technique, they settled on their ultimate version of Gymnopedie No 1.

I then asked Fable to compare it to the open source version I'd downloaded from Mutopia, which it promptly ripped apart. No sustain, zero rubato, upside down balance.

Ok, what about the version I'd just bought?

The PianoDisc versions are mp3s encoded with the right channel carrying MIDI to be played on the piano, and the left channel containing any accompanying music to be played through attached speakers (who doesn't want the harmonica on Piano Man?)

I gave the mp3 to Fable, which promptly decoded the format, identifying the right channel carrying MIDI using a 2004.5 Hz square wave.

It then went on to analyze the nuance of pedal lift and melody relative to the chords.

Fable then asked if I wanted it to build an encoder to write my own MIDI files into the right channel of mp3s.

Sounds great, and I instructed it to write the encoder.

What it came back with was a python encoder PLUS a decoder.

In the verbose explanation, it mentioned decoy notes.

Curious, I asked it to explain the decoy notes.

Apparently PianoDisc adds obfuscation into their format which is handled properly by their decoder, but would leave naively extracted MIDI unplayable on other systems.

Fable created an encoder which adds those decoy notes, and a decoder which removes them.

Am I allowed to publish the decoder? The encoder?

160 points | 98 commentspage 2
altairprime 4 hours ago|
Your intentions can reasonably be interpreted by a court as attempting to avoid paying a commercial software licensing fee. Use of Fable is, in your specific instance, irrelevant to whatever the outcome would be; the finding of intent holds plausible regardless of what tools and/or contractors you used to pursue your intent. Seek legal counsel if you wish to publish. (I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice.)
mft_ 2 hours ago||
IANAL but... isn't this somewhat analogous to side-loading apps on iOS or Android? As in, Google/Apple make it awkward for you to provide your own files to run on your phone, but ultimately it's not impossible nor illegal.

Likewise, if you're able to upload your own custom MIDI (or other) files for your piano to play, then all you'd be doing is sharing a utility that creates mixed audio/MIDI MP3s, which may or may not be used to create files which can then be legitimately uploaded to a piano.

severak_cz 1 hour ago||
> The PianoDisc versions are mp3s encoded with the right channel carrying MIDI to be played on the piano, and the left channel containing any accompanying music to be played through attached speakers (who doesn't want the harmonica on Piano Man?)

What a cursed format!

I don't understand what the designers were thinking of... 2000 Hz square wave on right channel? Seriously? Nobody would hear something suspicious and nobody would literally see it on spectrum analyzer. Maybe it's holdover from analog days and it was on casette tape before.

Also somebody reverse engineered it before - https://www.kinura.net/mid2pianocd/

So Fable probably just igested it from documentation of this software or some very obscure forum thread somewhere.

sandos 4 hours ago||
Recently had a similar, but likely more severe problem: I noticed Sol decompiled some proprietary code to re-implement some functionality for an emulation I wanted to use internally.

Now its likely soiled and I have to throw it away. Doh! I asked it about legality and it went "its almost green" but when googling, reverse-enginnering like that seems very illegal.

The weird thing is in this case, it could have pretty easily gotten the needed info from using the code as a black box, and that is apparently legal!

userbinator 1 hour ago|
Soon enough you will realise that everything is a derivative work, and the sooner that happens to everyone, the faster the delusion of Imaginary Property will disappear and lead to actual competition and progress.
gbnwl 4 hours ago||
This is a nit but his name is actually Erik Satie not Eric Satre.
salviati 2 hours ago||
Thanks! I was confused, thinking "Is it Satie, or is this a case of Muphry's law?". I wanted to learn more about this Satre composer I never heard of.
ted_dunning 3 hours ago||
It's a nit. They made a typo.
bambax 2 hours ago||
> some music from Eric Satre, a 19th century French composer

> Gymnopedie No 1

Eric (or as he preferred, Erik) SATIE.

fennecfoxy 1 hour ago||
IANAL, especially not an American one.

But if you're worried just pop it on anon GH.

Besides the fact that this sort of protection through obfuscation is dead now anyway. If you can ask an LLM to do it so can I, or anybody else. The only downside is duplication of work/wasted tokens but eh.

AI has already started commoditising software. Hopefully we see more OS' lean into the "safe" layer that runs everything and then temporary/custom interfaces dynamically created by AI on top.

franky47 6 hours ago||
typo: did you mean Erik Satie?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Satie

noduerme 2 hours ago||
I'm sorry, I'm hung up on the idea that an LLM could look at a midi file and listen to something and write an improved version with better sustain. Did you feed it other midi files, or was this something it was able to accomplish by parsing raw audio of Piano Man?
hypfer 2 hours ago|
From my understanding of laws in Germany, in Germany, you're allowed to do all of this if your goal is interoperability of systems.

If your goal is to not pay them money - which you strategically unwisely hinted at with this question - then that's not covered by that exemption, I think.

So from my understanding, adding new music and releasing the tooling for that should be fine, but IANAL.

Frankly, what is or isn't legal doesn't matter as much as your story, as you will be judged by that. It also helps if the story is actually genuine, but that is a somewhat optional requirement all things considered. At least the industry treats it as such.

__

FWIW, as these capabilities trickle down to everyone through LLMs, it is worth asking yourself whether it is worth the trouble of releasing it in the first place.

If anyone can replicate this within a reasonably short timespan, then maybe not.

___

With this stuff in particular, it's also worth considering the business model of the entity.

Does your work pose a relevant risk for their bottom line? If yes, then bad. If no, then shrug.

Is music sold their main revenue channel, or are they just also doing that because recurring revenue is nice to have?

How user-friendly would you want your work to end up as? Would it target the demographic that would otherwise just buy the music?

Truth is that this is all just an elaborate dance.

___

To close the "polish trains" gap in what I just wrote in the last section:

"Is their business model ethical? And is it considered that by the majority, common sense, and politicians?"

jiehong 21 minutes ago|
That’s the way.

And because software vendors never provide a Linux version of their stuff, you kinda have to do it anyways, because you end up with a hardware piece you can’t use without.

More comments...