19 Aug
2005
19 Aug
'05
3:36 p.m.
tim hall wrote:
On Friday 19 August 2005 12:26, Shayne O'Connor
wrote:
No, I don't believe any rights are granted if there is no license.
this has got nothing to do with creative commons licensing.
That so doesn't answer my reservations.
I'm not talking about selling my music to a product, it's not sick, it's
business.
yes, and business is a bit removed from music. well, i think it is ...
but i'm a bit of a fascist in this regard
anyhow, i didn't think you were talking about *your* music at all, i
thought you were talking about Ozric Tentacles (whoever they are) and
their obviously depraved decision to become prostitutes for Ford.
If it were a product I believed in I would have no qualms about
That's
an assumption on your part which I don't share. You have to
consciously accept a contract (i.e. sign it or =) in order for it to be
binding under British law (ANAL). I think you have to at least shake
hands in order for it even to be considered a 'gentleman's agreement'.
which brings me back to my (and probably your) point - what *are* we
allowed to do with it? by allowing us to download the song ie - copy it
- you have granted us some sort of rights, haven't you? how far do these
rights go (i'm talking only in the context of what a CC license allows)? - if we
*weren't*, then we'd potentially be exposing everyone on the list to
breaking the law.
Really?!? I will be very careful about what I post on this list if that
_is_ the case. It would be good to clarify this.
I think I'm slightly at odds with the consensus here. I am primarily a
writer of music, before even being a performer or player. I am still
quite new to using computers for this task. While I think Free Licensing
for creative works is a good idea, I'm not entirely convinced by the
ramifications. My chief worry is that while I would be flattered if any
of my music was used to promote something I believe in, I would be mighty
pissed off if it got used to advertise some ecologically damaging product
or xenophobic attitude. The
problem with advertising and music is that it's much more emotional
than software. If someone with radically different politics uses that
software very publicly, it doesn't imply any kind of endorsement of the
final product on the part of the software developer. Music or a public
appearance does create the impression of endorsement. As an audience's
support is somewhat style dependent, this can be critical. Ozric
Tentacles lost a lot of fans over the Ford commercial they did.
selling your music to a product is sick, i hope most people would agree.
unless, i guess, you write jingles for a living. pursuing such a course of action. Any piece under a
completely free license
could be used by any company for a free jingle totally legally. There would
be no way to stop this. Highly unlikely, I'll wager. But that's not the
point. I shall keep asking this question until I get a satisfactory answer.
what question? i don't understand what you mean by "free jingle" ... i'm
pretty sure it would be against a non-commercial CC license for a song
to be used in advertising. in any case, i can't really envision a piece
of advertising or product endorsement that wouldn't be considered
commercial. Free/open advertising?! That's like a contradiction of terms!
shayne