15 Feb
2013
15 Feb
'13
4:11 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:19 PM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
On Thursday 14 February 2013 19:25:22 michael noble
wrote:
ask,
If I had anything released in that sense you'd be welcome to it. Most of
what I do is live. The few recordings I have on soundcloud are just rough
live recordings from jams or improv shows. You are welcome to my puredata
patches I use for sequencing if that interests you.
I occasionally have an impulse to produce a recorded product for general
consumption but it doesn't interest me that much. I do enjoy the studio as
an instrument, as Eno puts it, but stereo recordings as artistic objects
lend themselves readily to misappropriation, and exposure to a potentially
unwilling public via portable stereo systems, as many have pointed out in
this discussion. The stereo system has become ubiquitous and to a certain
extent, I find it an unimaginative engagement with technology and sound. An
obvious exception for me might be something like generative apps which
process live inputs, like rjdj. In an age where stereo recordings can be so
easily reproduced, I think as creative artists we can do so much better
that producing stereo recordings. We want to talk about freedom, then why
not try unshackling ourselves from this system of distribution that is so
closely tied to the history of copyright and will be so for many many years
to come. Why not release everything in Ambisonic B-format, for example, a
patent-unencumbered surround format? But who knows, maybe next week I'll
change my mind and release a stereo recording. After all, I suppose that is
my right and my freedom.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Louigi Verona
<louigi.verona(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
> This is where we differ, at least on the
surface of it. I think that it
> is unethical
> to make people ask you permission after you publicly released
something.
> When I release a tune or a story or an
invention, I do not aim to
become
a tyrant,
who, by virtue of his work now has the world grant him a
positive obligation.
The common decency you speak about is not common to me. To me making
people asking permission is being a jerk.
You are reading in language which was never used to argue against a case
that was not made. He didn't claim that it was right to "make" people
he just said that asking was the decent thing to
do, something with
which I
fully agree. The same technologies that make
copying infinitely more easy
also make communication infinitely more easy, so I don't see why its an
invasion of liberty to seek permission for appropriation whenever
possible.
I release my stuff BY-SA and GPL. I don't want you to ask about that stuff.
Send me a link to what you have done if you like. I do like being surprised
at how different things people do can be to what I had originally
conceived.
Plus, permssion does not scale. It is monopoly firendly, not Freedom
friendly
in a netwroked world.
all the best,
drew