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

[Brad Fuller]

Shayne O'Connor wrote:

> Lee Revell wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 20:35 +0100, tim hall wrote:
>>
>>> If we are going to assume CC status for works posted here
>>
>>
>>
>> IANAL but I am almost positive that would not hold up in a US court.
>> Creative works default to "All rights reserved", which includes anything
>> posted to this list without a specific license attached, regardless of
>> what the informal list policy is.
>
>
> just in the interests of clarifying something (i doubt it will serve 
> much practical purpose here):
>
> it is agreed that, in the absence of any other licensing information, 
> that creative works will default to "All rights reserved" ... but out 
> of interest, does posting a link with explicit permission to download 
> (ie copy) a song, give up any copyrights *in that instance* ? because 
> you are, in effect, lifting some of those implied copyright 
> restrictions (otherwise it would be against the law to make a copy of 
> it, wouldn't it?).


One needs specific authorization from the copyright owners (both from 
composers and the ones who own the sound recording) to distribute or 
reproduce copyrighted recorded works.

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.

-- 
Brad Fuller
(408) 799-6124
** Sonaural Audio Studios **
(408) 799-6123  West San Jose
(408) 799-6124  Cambrian
________________________________
Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com