[cc-sampling] name change

MARK / negativland markhosler at bellsouth.net
Wed Aug 4 17:10:08 EDT 2004


This is your moderator speaking -

Let's all keep voicing our thoughts here, but 
lets also all try extra hard to be nice and civil 
here as we do it,  me included!

We all want this thing to be great, otherwise we wouldn't be on this list.

SMILEY FACE!!!!
HUGS!!
KISSES!!
Mark



At 9:41 PM +0100 8/4/04, David wrote:
>On 4 Aug 2004, at 20:21, Christopher M. Kelty wrote:
>
>>
>>oh please.  Creative Commons is not the government, they can do
>>whatever they like. I think they (actually it's really only 2-3 really
>>hard working people) did a pretty good job of trying to incorporate
>>feedback from this list. i'm sorry you feel so downtrodden, and i wish
>>it could have been different. I wish there had been a worldwide
>>plebecite to determine the proper name of the license. but alas, there
>>was not.
>>
>
>Clearly Creative Commons is not the government - 
>if it were I would be seriously considering 
>voting for regime change.
>
>So what is it is 2-3 people? Does that mean they 
>should be left to do whatever they like? Why 
>bother setting up the list to discuss it. And if 
>Creative Commons is unresponsive to its 
>supporters and thinks it can do the hell it 
>likes - then it clearly is not the organisation 
>I thought it was.
>
>It's tough to be criticised but with power comes 
>responsibility, whether you like it or not.
>
>And actually there *was* a debate about the name 
>of the license. And yes a decision was made. And 
>the decision was to call it the SAMPLING LICENSE!
>
>>If it pisses you off, don't use the license! go make your own!  Or
>>just call it the Sampling License. Creative Commons cannot and will
>>not stop you. Call it whatever you like!  Start your own nonprofit!
>>Free us from the tyranny of Minister Gil!  Please do it somewhere
>>other than in my mailbox though...
>>
>
>Forking the license is hardly the point, and 
>perhaps forking whenever there is disagreement 
>about something is like pressing a nuclear 
>button just because someone says something they 
>don't like. I believe in debate and deliberation 
>rather than petulantly walking off.
>
>In any case, Creative Commons has power, it has 
>written the licenses and it is promoting and 
>advertising them. But of course, you know this 
>as well as I do, and should I leave the debate 
>and 'set up my own license' you will continue to 
>be the big player. Neither of us will gain from 
>the situation and you are alienating a 
>(critical) supporter.
>
>As regards your desire to protect your mailbox, 
>if you feel that you would not like to be 
>involved in this debate any longer I would 
>suggest that you leave the list.
>
>Regards
>
>David
>
>
>---
>
>http://www.locarecords.com
>
>
>
>>ck
>>
>>On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 08:02:20PM +0100, David wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>And for the grand finale, Minister of Culture Gilberto Gil will
>>>>officially release a few of his songs under the License Formerly
>>>>Known as Sampling, which, from this moment forward, will be called
>>>>Recombo, a name inspired by the Brazilian art collective re:combo.
>>>>Minister Gil was in Lisbon last week, playing with Paul McCartney
>>>>and others, and just earlier this week he inaugurated the Brazil v.
>>>>Argentina futebol match with song on national television. Needless
>>>>to say we are humbled and thrilled beyond belief to have him
>>>>preside over this important day. And as if that weren't enough, Mr.
>>>>Gil is playing a live show later tonight. Recombo-licensed songs
>>>>will be featured.
>>>>
>>>>Brazil offers two gifts to the world today: Recombo creativity, and
>>>>the music of Gilberto Gil.
>>>>
>>>>More soon. Stay tuned.
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----
>>>
>>>Now that's what I call democracy!
>>>
>>>Certainly questions should be asked...
>>>
>>>- Who exactly was so inspired I wonder?
>>>
>>>- Why exactly are we naming licenses after currently existing groups?
>>>(In which case I would have preferred the Negativland license myself
>>>;-)
>>>
>>>- What (to repeat an earlier question I asked) was the point of this
>>>list?
>>>
>>>- Does anyone have the feeling that the sampling license (RIP) has
>>>become an advertising hoarding?
>>>
>>>- Will Creative Commons stay quiet and hope that this whole debate will
>>>go away if they ignore it?
>>>
>>>- Does anyone at Creative Commons *care* about what people involved in
>>>this list think about being so blatantly used, ignored and overruled!
>>>
>>>David
>>>
>>>---
>>>
>>>http://www.locarecords.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 4 Aug 2004, at 18:35, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>>>
>>>>Thomas Margoni wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I hope David will be wrong, so if anyone knows why there's a new
>>>>>name for this license, i hope he/her will post this list, as it
>>>>>is still on
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4234
>>>>http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4236
>>>>http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4303
>>>>
>>>>--    Mike Linksvayer
>>>>   http://creativecommons.org/learn/aboutus/people#21
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>cc-sampling mailing list
>>>>cc-sampling at lists.ibiblio.org
>>>>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-sampling
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>cc-sampling mailing list
>>>cc-sampling at lists.ibiblio.org
>>>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-sampling
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>cc-sampling mailing list
>>cc-sampling at lists.ibiblio.org
>>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-sampling
>
>_______________________________________________
>cc-sampling mailing list
>cc-sampling at lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-sampling


-- 
© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
AHOY THERE! I have changed my e-mail address and it is now -

mark / negativland <markhosler at bellsouth.net>


My old address at markhosler at charter.net is no longer being used.



More information about the cc-sampling mailing list