On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 08:30:14PM +0200, rosea grammostola wrote: Ugh, both of those are Flash. Please, no. I'm personally very happy with Patrick's "Best Of" compliations! I've been very much enjoying the 2010 one. Excellent music, as good or better than a lot of commercially-released stuff I've heard lately. His format is perfect: just a simple, straight-up m3u playlist, all the songs are tagged, goes right into my player for mobile listening enjoyment, and onto my hard drive for archiving. For example, I make a directory and then do this: wget -O - http://djcj.org/audio/lam/lam-tracks-2010/lam10.m3u | while read i; do wget -c "$i"; done It couldn't get any simpler or more elegant for linux. He mirrors it so it downloads quickly and there are no dead links (as are occasionally the case with LAM). I think if he (or a couple people) could be coaxed into producing such a compilatoin playlist quarterly instead of annually, that'd be just about perfect. I think the missing peice of LAM is the discussion. You post stuff here on LAU, you get feedback, comments, suggestions, thanks, praise, and an ego-boost. Post stuff to LAM and you never know if what you did was any good, no feedback. So I don't think LAM will ever replace posting to the list, unless he wanted to turn LAM into a BBS, and then it'd just be yet another BBS to log into and check, then from there turn it into a mailing list, and then we've come full circle back to LAU again. Now, all that said, maybe if someone were to write a perl or python script that automatically scraped mp3 or ogg URLs off of LAU and added them to an RSS feed or M3U playlist (or even submitted them to LAM), that might address the issue too. f'rinstance, some years ago I hacked this up for some long-since-forgotten purpose: -ken

has anyone checked this: http://alonetone.com/ the source for the whole site is available. -Alex On 0, Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:

On Tuesday 17 May 2011 17:07, Jeremy Jongepier wrote: Most likely, you're agreeing to give them those rights regardless of how you might be licensing your works for other people's consumption through their servers. It's a moot point, though, since their terms also include these: "USER irrevocably waives the right to assert any claim against SOUNDCLOUD or any of its respective parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, assigns, employees, agents, directors, officers or shareholders in relation to the Content generated, uploaded, transmitted or otherwise used on SOUNDCLOUD’s Website or Services, including, but not limited to, copyright, trademark, unfair competition, invasion of privacy, breach of contract or breach of confidentiality." TLDR: Even if we violate this agreement, you agree you can't sue us for it. Or anyone we do business with, pretty much. So, no, I don't see myself using Soundcloud for my music. Rob

On the flip side they would create a lot of bad faith by doing that so this is just a protection against litigious elements who would seek to bring them down by tying them up in unending court cases. Companies like Microsoft, Avid, Oracle, etc... Soundcloud provide an excellent service otherwise. I support them and have even paid them money to host my tracks. A whole $5, wow! It would be handy if everyone who used my services gave me $5.

On 05/18/2011 05:59 AM, Rob wrote: Nowhere it is mentioned that SoundCloud claims the right to use my work. It does mention: "User Generated Content 1. Any and all music, videos, photos, pictures, graphics, comments, and other content, data or information that USER uploads, stores, transmits or submits to SOUNCLOUD’s Website (hereinafter "Content") are generated by the USER, but not by SOUNDCLOUD. USER’s Content therefore remains in USER’s sole property and responsibility. 2. SOUNDCLOUD does not claim any ownership rights in any Content and other materials which USER uploads, posts, stores or exchanges through SOUNDCLOUD’s Website and Services." So my music remains mine and that includes any licences I put on it if I got that correctly. Below that I read: "Representations and Warranties USER represents and warrants to SOUNDCLOUD that: 4. USER’s Content is an original work by USER and/or USER has all necessary rights, licenses, consents and permissions to use, and to authorize SOUNDCLOUD to use, any and all copyrights, performance rights or other intellectual property rights in and to USER’s Content in order to use the Content on SOUNDCLOUD’s Website and Services;" And even further below: "Grant of License SOUNDCLOUD does not have any ownership rights in USER’s Content. After posting your Content on, through or in connection with the Services, you continue to retain any such rights that you may have in your Content, subject to the limited license SOUNDCLOUD requires so that it can perform the Service for its users: 1. By posting Content to the Website, to the extent required to enable the performance of the Services, USER grants SOUNDCLOUD and its successors and assigns and other users of the SOUNDCLOUD Services a limited worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid up, license to use, copy, transmit or otherwise distribute, publicly perform, digitally perform, publicly display, and/or otherwise make USER’s Content available to other users of SOUNDCLOUD’s Website and Services. 2. This license does not grant SOUNDCLOUD the right to sell USER’s Content or otherwise distribute it outside of SOUNDCLOUD's Website or Services, provided however, that streaming of Content on third party Websites via embedded widgets or the SOUNCLOUD API or similar tools (“Linked Services”) shall not be deemed a distribution outside of SOUNDCLOUD’s Website or Service. 3. USER may set further restrictions to the licenses granted under Subsections 1 to 3 of this Section at any time in the track settings, including but not limited to the restriction of the distribution of Content via Linked Services, or by marking Content “private”. 4. The license granted under Subsections 1 to 3 will terminate after USER removes the Content from the Website. Notwithstanding the foregoing, USER understands and agrees that once Content is distributed to a Linked Service, SOUNDCLOUD is not obligated to delete or ask other users or a Linked Service to delete that Content, and therefore that Content may continue to appear and be used indefinitely." So afaics they don't claim anything. It's a moot point, though, since their terms also include I don't see any problem here, I also don't see the relation with CC licensed content. But I'm in no way a legal expert so if I got things mixed up please let me know :) Best, Jeremy