On 03/08/2011 11:59 AM, Rafal Zawadzki wrote: Hello Rafał, Properly licensed: CC or any other licence that allows for redistribution without prior consent. Easily available: direct links to music files or embedded players (like SoundCloud, Jamendo or even YouTube). So no RapidShare, SendSpace or similar services. Best, Jeremy

On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:38:51 +0000, Q <lists(a)quirq.ukfsn.org> wrote: I agree, +1. -- Rafal bluszcz Zawadzki Django / Plone / Python / dub / drum&bass http://dev.bluszcz.net/tech-blog http://soundcloud.com/bluszcz

Hi, Of course - I think everyone respect it and appreciate effort of Jeremy. There are two points in above ;) First - yes, it is very good idea to promote free culture. Just the list should be called in this case "Free music made with Linux". About "enough space to express themselves" - there is never enough of promotion :) Well, as long you are not labeleb by EMI and played on MTV ;) Cheers, I am going back work as well. -- Rafal bluszcz Zawadzki Django / Plone / Python / dub / drum&bass http://dev.bluszcz.net/tech-blog http://soundcloud.com/bluszcz

Hello Cedric! I don't want to start another flame war, so please take this only as an opinion and certainly not an offense. I suppose we might have a few people, who hold the copyright to their music. By not having otherwise expressed a copyright yet, I'm one of them. But how do I have "more space" to get an airing? What makes my way of distribution so different? Granted, upto now, people should ask me, if they want to redistribute my music. But otherwise, my way of getting open air, open ears and listeners, is the same as all the CC-by-SA chaps. I don't take any money for my music, well most of it. :-) I use open source tools and move within this community, have done so for 10 years now and don't think of abstaining. the only thing I wish is to have some control over my music. I like to follow it, see that it doesn't get used for purposes, that I can't agree with. I don't prohibit anyone from listening to it FOR FREE, showing it to friends, playing it - god forbid - at a party :-)... You get my meaning. And now I have been writng too long. Sorry. :-) And yes of course I respect Jeremy's restrictions, but I agree with Q in that I can't see much reason in this restriction, with the possible exception of limiting sheer mass of input. It would just be nice to see the point, if it is of an ideological nature, I'm sure it would be of more value, it being explained, otherwise, how shall one understand. Still, I respect it and won't flame him for it. But it's always allowed to ask and understand, especially if you have the feeling, that something - possibly worthwhile, beautiful or useful might escape you. Warmly yours Julien -------- Music was my first love and it will be my last (John Miles) ======== FIND MY WEB-PROJECT AT: ======== http://ltsb.sourceforge.net the Linux TextBased Studio guide ======= AND MY PERSONAL PAGES AT: ======= http://www.juliencoder.de

Cedric Roux wrote: Sorry, I didn't notice this bit first time round, as I was taking a hasty break from trying to get the car to start. Of course it's his choice and I never demanded he do anything other than what he chooses, I was merely questioning his choice and, in particular, his use of words. I'm sure it was only an unfortunate choice of words and that there was nothing implied in the use of the word "proper". However, I would not hold it against anyone who inferred some sort of veiled putdown or slight. Whilst Jeremy is an individual and speaks for no-one but himself when providing his useful and valuable service, his actions -- all of our actions -- reflect on the community as a whole. It's one thing to promote an idea, but to promote it and also very vocally and vehemently attack any opposing view is not very welcoming. Sometimes this list can be a hostile place and it can seem that choice is fine for those who choose the "one true way". It's often a question of biting your tongue and keeping your head down when the groupthink sets in. As I said in my other message, Linux users are a diverse bunch who use it for diverse reasons. I'm thickskinned, I can cope with the occasional feelings of being a pariah when there's a flame-fest of a thread going on about copyright and licences, but I just wonder how it makes many others feel and what negative impact it might have on the community. The use of "copyright (all rights reserved)" doesn't exclude the concept of free sharing when what you're sharing is the information "I thought this was great, you might like it, you can find it here <link>". You don't need CC to do that. Anyway, apologies for rambling, too much time on my hands ;-) "I used to like to go to work, but they shut it down / I got a right to go to work but there's no work here to be found..." Respectfully Q

Jeremy Jongepier wrote: Well, neither am I and none of what I said should be construed as legal advice ;-) I think the court cases that there have been have been over deep-linking i.e. to something other than the main page of a website, or where people have linked to stuff within a frame, which makes it look like the content is from a different site to what it actually is. As I understand it, linking is not distributing or redistributing -- if it were, the web wouldn't be able to exist, as merely providing a link would be distributing someone's copyrighted work (the website and its content). Anyway, please keep up the sterling job with your round-up -- it's a most useful resource. Best wishes Q