On Saturday 20 August 2005 01:11, Shayne O'Connor wrote: > > IANAL either, but I would propose that if you posted a message to a > > specific group (not the world) and indicate that they are allowed to > > download a piece, you are in fact giving them the option to listen to > > your piece for free. But, they don't own the piece. There is nothing > > implied in the act of allowing them to listen to it that indicates they > > can transfer the piece to someone else. Because, they don't have the > > right ?-- only the copyright owner does. > > just want to make clear - i'm not talking about giving up > ownership/authorship/licensing fees ... i'm talking about sharing music, > as in "am i allowed to keep this in my shares folder when using > soulseek/amule/etc? am i allowed to aggregate/distribute it along the > lines of RadIO or Commontunes.org?". No, not if it's not licensed. This is why CC and the like is so important. > this is a pretty important question, i think, and not entirely black and > white .... you have to remember that a lot of these copyright laws are, > like, in a different dimension to what reality consitutes these days. Now, if you're going to start asking complicated questions about the nature of reality I'm out of here. ;) Copyright is pretty straightforward by comparison. -- cheers, tim hall http://glastonburymusic.org.uk/tim
