Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] sampling + 1.0 and remix competition, with prize for winner

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: rob AT robmyers.org
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] sampling + 1.0 and remix competition, with prize for winner
  • Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 11:26:10 +0100

Quoting Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>:

Well actually, I'm not entirely sure about that. I have my 4 freedoms
pretty much:

1) I can use the work (listen to it)

Unless you need to re-encode it (which is not covered by Fair Use in some
countries).

2) I can pass it on to my friends (because that's non-commercial)

Copying and distribution of the entire work is prohibited under Sampling.
Sampling Plus allows noncommercial copying and sharing, yes.

p2p sharing is defined as commercial use under US law. This is something CC have
had to work around for NC.

3) I can modify the work to my needs (and now the NC goes away)

Under sampling plus this strips the NC yes. Under sampling it's not there
anyway. But under NC sampling plus it doesn't.

4) I can share my modified work (even commercially)

You cannot use it in advertising however. I know, I know, but it's still a
restriction. :-)

It's interesting, because, really, it's the "transformative" uses that
really matter in terms of the copyleft culture.

As an artist certainly these are the uses I wish to make. But in fact all uses
count equally. If we cannot listen or share we cannot transform. We must not
privilege creation/transformation above the work of distribution and
consumption when considering use, otherwise creation/transformation will
suffer.

I agree that FSF and DFSG guidelines would probably come down
on the side of it being non-free, but it's in an interesting and more
useful case than the By-NC or By-NC-SA (which prohibit the
transformative commercial case).

Oh certainly. I love the Sampling license, even if I'd never use or recommend
it. BY-NC and BY-NC-SA (notice the ordering of terms...) are what happens when
you privilege creativity/transformation to the detriment of
creativity/transformation.

IOW, it's easy to produce a
"free as in speech" work -- all I have to do is disintegrate the original
into samples or patches, and the unordered collection is a free
work in the FSF/DFSG sense.

At least, that's my understanding at this point.

I think you would not be able to distribute the samples raw, you would have to
use them in a derivative work. And there is no requirement to "provide source".

Hmm. Well, I think that what constitutes "transformation" is
probably subject to interpretation. In a big way.

I can tell you two things that won't work ;-) :

* "I have transformed this work by altering its context."

* "I have transformed this work because I say so."

- Rob.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page