[cc-licenses] Case study: Magnatune
daniel.carrera at zmsl.com
Mon Nov 21 18:23:09 EST 2005
drew Roberts wrote:
> My take is that unlees you have a license or some text somewhere
> to the effect that the wav is under the same license, it would be
> dangerous to assume that it is.
I'm not assuming anything, and I'm not trying to get permission to
distribute an album I just bought to more than 3 friends. I just think I
hit an interesting question whose answer I don't know, and an important
> Think of mp3 as low res and wav as high res and I think you would see why
> someone might not want this "automaticly under the same license" idea to fly.
I have no doubt. But the question is whether the idea is correct.
> You could even give a text file to party A with a CC BY-SA license and to
> party B with an all rights reserved license. Party B might know about party
> A's license, but unless they can get a copy from A or someone else A has
> distributed to, they would not to my mind be able to pretend they have the
> BY-SA licensed version. (Anyone see where I can be wrong in this thought?)
This depends on whether the license is attached to the *file* or the
"work". And this is ultimatley the question I'm trying to ask.
/\/_/ No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
\/_/ However, a significant number of electrons were
/ were severely inconvenienced.
More information about the cc-licenses