[cc-community] Ask for help: I agreed to a license by mistake

Cesare Marilungo cesare at poeticstudios.com
Thu Feb 21 20:08:24 EST 2008


Terry Hancock wrote:
> Cesare Marilungo wrote:
>   
>> I'm not saying that the people at Opsound are doing this to trick people 
>> into choosing a license unintentionally.
>>     
>
> My reference to fraud wasn't directed at Opsound. It's just that if
> intent were not a requirement for licensing, then there's lots of ways
> that a (hypothetical) hosting company could defraud contributors.
>
>   
>> It was clear to me that the page
>> simply linked to the mp3s hosted on my server.
>>     
>
> I suspect that a *listing* service is probably distinct from a *hosting*
> service. Since Opsound never actually *had* your file, they can't
> *release* it under the CC-By-SA license. They can only claim (falsely)
> that *you* have released it under that license.
>
> That would, of course, put you in breach of contract with them for
> misrepresenting your license -- they'd be entirely within their rights
> to deny you further services because of this incident.
>
> But you did this unintentionally, and you have taken steps to rectify
> the error. Which, IMHO, clears you of that obligation (it would be
> different if you were actively trying to fool them in order to get more
> exposure).
>
> One question I do have -- did you mark the works with your By-NC-ND
> license (for example, in the MP3's ID3 metadata)? Such a notice should
> be adequate for downloaders, regardless of what they may have read on
> the Opsound site.
>   
At the time they were. Recently I re-uploaded all the mp3s on my server 
with a better quality and I didn't put any info about the license since 
I thought that people who downloaded them from my website would have 
read the license on the page.

In my profile page on Opsound I've put the link to my website for 
additional informations, and there the license has always been by-nc-nd.
> (I should probably reiterate at this point that I am NOT a lawyer, just
> an interested observer).
>
> I should like to point out that, like Drew, I am primarily interested in
>  CC-By-SA or CC-By music (as source material). For me, NC-ND work isn't
> really all that different from ARR (under fair use, much of what NC-ND
> allows is already legal).
>   
I understand this. And I agree with you. It's just that I should know if 
I'm giving my work to the commons (like I do when I write software 
released under GPL to contribute to the open source movement vs. all the 
software I write to earn a living, which isn't).

Also, the web (as well as peer to peers, torrents) are full of 
copyrighted mp3s shared illegally. By-nc-nd gives you the permission to 
do this legally. Releasing your own music under this license you also 
take the statement that you don't think that music should be sold. That 
you want to communicate and share your art first, and that support to 
artist should be voluntary. All the people I have met in person think 
that this is crazy. Go figure.
> However, a situation like the one you describe is a panic situation for
> me if I've used your work in, say, a GPL-licensed game software, because
> suddenly, you've rendered my work non-free, and now *I'm* making
> promises I can't deliver on. In such a situation, I have to immediately
> pull the work, replace the track with something appropriately licensed,
> and inform all downstream users of the track that the work I promised
> them was legal and free-licensed is actually *neither*. Which is a
> serious slap-in-the-face to *my* reputation, not just yours.
>
> When a license is misrepresented or changed like this, it may harm
> hundreds (or even millions for a popular package) of people you've never
> even met. It's very important for the benefit of the community to
> establish that a work was in fact licensed under a given license, and
> not to be able to revoke it after the fact.
>   
I understand this, too. You're right. But if somebody has used those 
tracks on a gpl game or a movie or something else or he/she has made a 
cover or sampled a track he should have credited me. And I would have 
know about this. If this hypothetical derived work could not be found by 
googling, I can safely assume it has never been published. What I'm 
trying to say is that I am sure nobody would be hurted.

So what do you think I should do? :-)

Best,

-c.
> Cheers,
> Terry
>
>   


-- 
www.cesaremarilungo.com 



More information about the cc-community mailing list