drew Roberts wrote: > On Monday 18 January 2010 16:10:22 you wrote: > >> <snip> >> Greetings Rosea and Drew, >> >> I was making a broader philosophical, and political, point about how the >> advance of human knowledge and technology occurred via the process of >> building upon prior work, for most of history - freely shared. >> Absolutely nothing novel or profound here. It's the essence of the >> concept of Free Software, and the essence of what was lost when >> knowledge became proprietary. >> > > Surely, although there were / are other ways to keep knowledge out of the > hands of some even without copyrights and patents. > Tragically so, Drew. >> It's what Stallman wrote about, and the reason for the GPL, or >> copyleft. Raymond's bazaar is largely where Open Source resides. >> > > True, but RMS makes a distinction wrt functional works. > Something of which you are more familiar than I. I'll take a look to refresh my memory. >> The point here is more circumscribed and sharply focused. First, we did >> not even offer to sell our music - we simply gave it away. I'm not sure >> if we ever even had a donation link up. >> > > I don't think we did anything for income. > > >> I don't believe so. Right. I recall its having come up briefly in a discussion, and I suppose you'd actually have to develop an argument for posting ANYthing on the Internet without including a "Donate" button. Well...maybe not vacation photos! >> However, had we offered our work for sale, in addition to what Drew cites above, >> the answer to your question is...our customers. Anyone wanting to buy >> our finished CD could/would have paid for it. Especially if we posted >> no freely downloadable mixed and mastered finished tracks. >> > > Of course, that play could turn off our fans as much as get them to buy. I > would be interested in experimenting with the limited edition set sale if we > ever get a popular album / single recorded Frank. Perhaps you and I can work > on that some after Feb this year if you have some time. > Absolutely! I was not suggesting that, even for consideration, and it would not "feel" right to me in any event. I'm alway open to extending Packet-In, but first we've got to create something significant without some of our key players. I'm frantically practicing my djembe! Seriously, just over 4 weeks in, I'm making sufficient progress where I'll likely use this instrument in my compositions, and maybe contribute tracks of it to others. >> Think about that in the context of our discussion here: How cool would >> that CC by SA/Commercial hybrid model be? We'd still post our >> individual tracks, but anyone wanting our "version" of our work could >> buy it. >> > > I would suggest we offer it for download at a set your own price (including > $0) > A reasonable proposal. I assume Peter could turn on an e-commerce plug in to PayPal or something. > >> ALL our giant's shoulders would be sitting there inviting >> anyone interested to come and stand on them. Anyone could download them >> and mix and master them as they desire. They could, as I suggested in >> my original posting, drop my vocal and guitar parts, record their own, >> and polish off a finished derivative work! Sampling would take on a new >> meaning in that model. >> > > They could then offer theirs for download at a set your own price (with > whetever lower limit they like) > > We could also offer other licenses at a cost to those refusing to do BY-SA. (I > think once you publish a song, you can't prevent some of this anyway so we > may as well play that game if the opportunity arises. > Sure. >>>> Playing the advocate of the devil here... >>>> >>> Well.... who is going to pay you for your stuff when so many are doing >>> the Free thing? Back at ya.... ~;-) >>> >>> >>>> \r >>>> >> Well, I rarely advocate the devil, but fully support your right to do so! >> >> Seriously, Rosea, these are indeed interesting, and valid questions, but >> I believe most folk's reflexive assumptions and answers are subject to >> scrutiny. We've ALL had our brains washed...and creme rinsed, I >> suppose. Go back and reread Bill Gates' open letter to the Homebrew >> Computer Club to see just how entrenched his assumptions were at such an >> early stage, and then trace the subsequent course of proprietary >> software, copyright, patents, P2P, lawsuits, SPA/RIAA/MPAA, etc. to >> gain some appreciation for exactly how big a red pill you'd have to >> swallow to shuck the influences under which we've labored to even begin >> to see the alternatives. >> > > Something that is really telling to me is the lengths the big boys feel they > need to go to to make the old ways work with the new tech available these > days. See: Is Copyright Dangerous To Democracy? > http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-copyright-dangerous-to-democracy.html > Telling, indeed. Stubbornness yielding to nothing and no one. What's most puzzling is that those embracing new opportunities are so often successful, and wildly so... > >>> all the best, >>> >>> drew >>> >> Frank >> > > drew > Frank _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
