[linux-audio-user] Announcing Gnomoradio

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



we used this for the Madonna remix project CD but were forced to dual 
license with regular copyright so we could get around the MCPS (our 
equivalent of ASCAP). thats a sting in the tail to watch out for, but 
the EFF / Creative Commons and i are going to do some lobbying which 
should hopefuly make things easier at least in the UK.

m~

John Bleichert wrote:

> Greetings (took me a while to catch up). What does everybody think of the
> Open Audio License?
> 
> http://www.eff.org/IP/Open_licenses/eff_oal.php
> 
> It won't really have any teeth until it survives litigation once, but...
> 
> 
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> 
>>Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 18:43:59 +0100
>>Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Announcing Gnomoradio
>>
>>Hallo,
>>Daniel James hat gesagt: // Daniel James wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>The non-commercial CC
>>>>license makes it a gift with a catch, or actually it makes it not a
>>>>gift at all in some sense.
>>>
>>>I disagree. We don't usually offer a gift to someone and expect the
>>>recipient to sell it. That's not a catch, that's just an expectation
>>>of civilised behaviour.
>>
>>Maybe, but we also wouldn't disallow anyone to sell a gift. There are
>>many reasons why someone would sell a gift, for example because some
>>money is needed and everything else's already sold.
>>
>>
>>>>"non-commercial use or
>>>>distribution only" means non-free
>>>
>>>I'm not sure the 'freedom' to make a living from someone else's work
>>>without contributing back is something that licences should
>>>encourage.
>>
>>True, and this is the catch of the "share alike" in creative commons
>>or open sourc/free software licenses: You can sell, but you must not
>>take away rights when selling.
>>
>>
>>>I'm not talking about remixers or samplers here - people
>>>who take the work and add something to it. I'm talking about the
>>>people who would sell the work as it is without adding any value, and
>>>keep the money for themselves.
>>
>>Just some more food for thought:
>>
>>CC is discussing a sampling license currently, see
>>http://creativecommons.org/projects/cc-sampling. This is of course an
>>interesting concept, but I keep asking myself, what other licenses the
>>lawyers will come up with, when future, yet unknown "common" uses will
>>pop up. Today it's sampling, that gets a special treatment, yesterday
>>it was filesharing, tomorrow it might be "public place sound
>>designing" or whatever. All these use cases might require special
>>exceptions to allow them without charge for some people. Compare that
>>to the simplicity of a real free license. You wouldn't need a
>>"sampling license" if you would be allowed to "sample" the whole tune
>>for whatever purpose in the first place.
>>
>>But I'm getting utopian now, I know. It's an old grassroot anarchist
>>heritage coming up again...
>>
>>ciao
>>--
>> Frank Barknecht                               _ ______footils.org__
>>
> 
> 
> // John Bleichert
> // syborg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 

-- 

        |\      _,,,---,,_
  ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_     HTTP 503: Too Busy
       |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL


"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are
subtle and will piss on your computer."
-- Bruce Graham


Musicians say No to RIAA Persecution and Prosecution of Music Lovers!

Sign the petition at http://www.copyleftmedia.org.uk/justsayno/


  .::. www.iriXx.org .::. www.copyleftmedia.org.uk .::.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [ALSA Devel]     [Sox Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Photo Sharing]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux