[advocacy] Open/Free/Personal music licenses

[Bacchus Thirteen]

--- Moritz Grimm <gtgbr at gmx.net> wrote:
Hello, Mortiz

> But I wouldn't recommend to promote it as the
> ultimate music swapping
> tool. Certain people might get it wrong and make
> Vorbis look like the
> tool of the devil himself. OGG Vorbis is a
> container, no more, and no
> less. It's good and free, and this is what matters,
> not what others
> think of fancy "security" functionality.

Yes, that is why I think we need to discuss here. 
When you musicians release your music in a container
called Ogg, you must be informed that your music is
shared without any protection in advance.  Musicians
should be able to chose the ways of releasing their
music in which format and under which license.  In the
case of Napster, there was virtually no discussion
until the music industry sued Napster.  We didn't make
use of the convbenience of the net, did we?  ;-)

> Are artists (making entertainment music, for
> example) really that rare
> and wanted? 

The record industry seems to see artists as comodity
or raw materials that should be marchandised.  It is
not avoidable as they are profit making organisations.
 However, the tendency is increasingly preventing
music fans from enjoying music.  I found this
non-sense.     

> My music is something very
> personal, and also I think
> that although it is sometimes "not nice" to listen
> to my music (yeeeh,
> manic depression r00lz ;P), I find it pretty good. I
> need that (maybe)
> fake feeling of being protected from people that
> abuse my music for
> money, for promoting child porn or racist websites
> ... whatever. It's
> pretty diffuse and I can hardly explain it. This
> "need" for security
> should not be underestimated, and properly addressed
> by licenses.

Different from Daniel, I think it is rather ideal if
musicians can choose from protected formats and Ogg
Vorbis.  As Mortitz wrote, the majority of users seem
to just want 'free rides.'  Not only musicians but
also programmer won't like their works to be dealt
without any respect.  This is very natural feeling. 
Musicians would rather choose protected formats than
Ogg Vorbis if they think such users who 'make use of
the grey zone as long as possible' are abusing their
music.  It is musicians' choice.  In an extreme
example, musicians can release their music on CD while
releasing some of the songs from them in Ogg Vorbis. 
More daring and freedom-oriented musicians would
prefer to use Ogg Vorbis, though.

>First, the needs of the artist must be dealt with,
then it's time to 
>see
>what liberties and rights can be granted to the
public.

Yes, I completely agree with you.

>Hm, interesting. It seems that the biggest part of
the problem is my
>very own lack of understanding. Assumed that I share
my feelings and
>half-knowledge with others, some colorful "open music
licenses for
>dummies" explanation with useful examples, based on a
solid base of
>international copyright law, would be of great value
for those I 
>believe
>you and others are targeting with your license(s).

Yes, more musician-oriented information is needed. 
MP3.com seems to be doing well in this respect. 
However, there seem to be so many of licenses… 
Daniel, is there any plan for 'Open music licenses for
dummies' or 'How to avoid being cheated by record companies?'

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'advocacy-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.