22 Dec
2002
22 Dec
'02
11:14 a.m.
On Sunday, December 22, 2002, at 07:42 AM, Vincent Touquet wrote:
Good point.
Maybe we should only serve loops that fall under
a usable creative commons license
[http://www.creativecommons.org/].
Its not interesting to serve loops on which
the original owner wants to exercise copyright
on anyway, because then its not exactly an
open loop library anymore.
Oh, I see what you're saying now. I still need to have my morning cup
of coffee, so I'm a little slow. :)
Indeed, part of the metadata should contain the license (which was
added to the list by Paul in a previous post), and the license should
meet a minimum "openness" standard before it can be accepted.
I've actually been keeping a close eye on the Creative Commons in
relation to another project I've been involved with (but not at liberty
yet to speak about, because I didn't start it). I think creating a
selection of CC licenses and having them available to choose from would
be the way to go, the same way SourceForge allows you to choose from a
list of licenses (or at least, that's how I understand it works).
Regards,
Darren Landrum