Tuesday 05 August 2003 11:10 skrev Robert Jonsson: > Tuesday 05 August 2003 10:49 skrev Daniel James: > > Look at any CD package; the licences tend to be about one paragraph > > long, and could be edited down to just one word - DON'T. A really > > good free music licence would be just as succinct. > > e.g 'DO' ? > > Sorry couldn't resist ;), but you have a valid point. > > On a related note, I read long ago (in Linux Journal i think) that Woody > Guthrie atleast on some records had a paragraph that sounded very much like > an open-content license (extremely open). Anybody know what it was? > > /Robert Responding to myself :) I went to their website and it was infact available, very cool. Turns out it was a songbook though, not a record. Quote from Linux Journal: " Copywright, Guthrie Style When Woody Guthrie was singing hillbilly songs on a little Los Angeles radio station in the late 1930s, he used to mail out a small mimeographed songbook to listeners who wanted the words to his songs. On the bottom of one page appeared the following: ``This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do.'' --Pete Seeger, June 1967 " /Robert > > > If you want to allow derivative versions, have a look at the bLiP > > licence. Second item down on: > > > > http://www.justablip.co.uk/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=4 > > > > Cheers > > > > Daniel
