[linux-audio-user] Re: Free music site can Cost!
fsmith at walescomputers.co.uk
Thu Sep 8 05:43:13 EDT 2005
Re the start of this thread,
I've been in touch with the company 'Roadnoise' and they have amended
there legalese, to bring it more into line with the Creative commons.
Just goes to show what can happen with one email to a list (it was the
Behringer V-Amp2 list on yahoo)
james at dis-dot-dat.net wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep, 2005 at 07:38PM +0300, Juhana Sadeharju spake thus:
>>>From: Randy Kramer <rhkramer at gmail.com>
>>> * a GPL license, you are allowing a non-GPL'd fork
>>> * a "commercial license", you are allowing them to compete with you at no
>>>cost and with no return to you
>>And they could make their site completely commercial. It would be
>>a major job to get the same music back if that happens after many
>>years. Guess, people should submit their music to as many places
>>What is the GPL for audio and for photos? Would that be a good idea?
>>I'm thinking a sound effect library and a photo library which could
>>be used, e.g., in games. I want that a game developer who makes
>>a sky texture box out of our photos would have to make his texture
>>I also would like to collect photos from all over the world, taken
>>by volunteers. The license should be good from the volunteer's
>>viewpoint. Their work should be credited properly. E.g., the sky box
>>by N.N. based on photo by M.M.
More information about the Linux-audio-user