[advocacy] Artist Licensing

[Bacchus 13]

---- "Karol Pietrzak" <noodlez84 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Thanks to Ogg Vorbis' very flexible tagging system, it can be 
> added _very_ easable with full backward-compatibility.  Simply 
> create a tag called "PGP_SIG" and put it in...
> --
> noodlez:   Karol Pietrzak
> PGP KeyID: 0x3A1446A0

Yes, it works and the standardization of the information is important
but I still think that the very flexibility of Ogg comment is a problem:
everybody can edit the information too easily.  I do not think there
is a need for protecting the information with the same enthusiasm as
patent companies do on their formats.  However, if the information is
editable by anyone, I wonder if artists would be happy with it.  I think
it would be better if the information were read-only.  Is this technically
difficult?

---on Wed 12 Sep 2001 Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS (edmundo at rano.org)wrote:

>That sounds like overkill to me. The artist can just put a list of MD5

>sums on their website, which you compare. GPG would protect you 
>against a "man in the middle" attack against your communication with

>the web site, but, since the data you're checking is music rather than

>a kernel module that might compromise an entire system, say, why would

>anyone organise such an elaborate attack? 

Yes, I agree.  Economically, there seems to be no need for that.  Simply,
it was not my point:  The reason for the protection is not economic.
 As long as artists feel their rights are respected, it should be enough.

I’ll repeat my point:  How many people care to read documentation on
personal license in reality?  Although Daniel’s document is written clearly,
I wonder how many care to read it.  Even if people have to pay, they
can get services without bothering reading ‘politically correct’ documents.
 Furthermore, how many people care to check the personal license name
lists let alone contact the artists through e-mail?  I don’t mean these
efforts are useless but there must be a better way to let them more effective.

Information should be as less exclusive as possible.  Even if information
is out there, if nobody knows it, it is as if the information did not
exist at all.  This is why economists are working on theories like game
theory, aren’t they?  The world of science may be fact-based but the
world of economy and marketing are not.  So, don’t allow the marketing
guys to play their own games.  Ogg multimedia project has to survive
in the most treacherous water of consumerism.  Let the beacon lit clearly
on our side: open source movement is not about piracy but about freedom
and rights from a different point of view.

In the user mailing list, I suggested setting option switches as a ‘common
language’ between programmers and audio compression format fans since
the source is technically exclusive.  On the other hand, the link between
artists and music fans is music.  However, piracy harms the relationship,
of which record industry can take advantage.  Therefore, I suggested
a possible way to realize the concept of personal license in the format.

I wonder if there is a way to introduce ordinary music fans and artists
into this ‘movement’ as naturally as possible.  I simply thought it could
be ideal if the personal license were sorted out clearly and simply for
music fans to see it.  For even if music fans don’t know about the discussion
on personal licensing, if the format itself is ‘signed’ by the creator
of music, virtually, this concept of personal licensing works.  Simply,
it is a way to let people conscious of the right of the artists.

Of course, I do not think it is the best idea.  However, I can’t upgrade
my own brain.  :-(  Any better idea or modification?

___________________________________________________________________
To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax,
all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.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.