[linux-audio-user] Specifying the license when posting music?

[Brad Fuller]

tim hall wrote:

>On Thursday 18 August 2005 16:15, Brad Fuller wrote:
>  
>
>>>Until we make a decision not to accept non-CC submissions to the list you
>>>should assume that a piece is copyright the author and all rights reserved
>>>unless explicitly licensed otherwise.
>>> 
>>>      
>>>
>>I would change to: "... unless explicitly licensed and stated otherwise."
>>
>>This is fair, unambiguous and similar in concept to the US copyright -
>>you write a tune, you automatically own the copyright, you're not
>>required to file for ownership. I think it should always be the case.
>>
>>(i guess we could also talk about the mechanical and publishing rights
>>as well. But, it seems that it would follow the same policy.)
>>    
>>
>
>Agreed.
>
>I don't actually think it's necessary to make policy on this issue, just 
>encourage people to state the licensing position clearly and continue to 
>encourage the use of free licensing. Making things mandatory can be 
>counter-productive in the pursuit of freedom.
>  
>
I agree with that.

I think people should assume that all forms of copyrights and all rights 
are held by the composer unless otherwise stated. I certainly don't want 
people to assume that just because the music is made with FOSS they can 
do anything they please with the posted assets.

brad