18 Jan
2010
18 Jan
'10
9:51 p.m.
drew Roberts wrote:
Something of which you are more familiar than I. I'll take a look to
refresh my memory.
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!
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.
A reasonable proposal. I assume Peter could turn on an e-commerce plug
in to PayPal or something.
Sure.
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...
drew
Frank
On Monday 18 January 2010 16:10:22 you wrote:
Tragically so, Drew.
<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.
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.
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. 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.
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)
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.
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
> all the
best,
drew
Frank