Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] choosing a new license at freesound, please help

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Brink <peter.brink AT brinkdata.se>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] choosing a new license at freesound, please help
  • Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:34:58 +0200

Evan Prodromou skrev:
On Wed, 2006-25-10 at 20:58 -0400, Greg London wrote:

Some freesound samples are long ( > 3 minutes ) of sounds "observed" by
someone on the street. I don't know if there is any legal difference
between the 100 millisecond sound of a bass drum and 3 minutes of the
sound of children playing in the fairground.
I swear I recall reading somewhere long ago that a sound
recording of a thunderstorm or waves crashing on a beach
was not copyrightable because there was no human expression
involved.

I swear that that is incorrect information. A photograph of a
thunderstorm or waves crashing on a beach is copyrightable. There is
human expression in the selection of the photographic subject, in the
framing of the picture, and in the technical choices (f-stop, type of
film, aperture, etc.). Similarly, a sound recording.

A photograph of a thunderstorm is not copyrightable. It's protected by a neighbouring right, the protection of ordinary photographs, which does not require any creativity on the part of the photographer. A mere human expression is not enough to call an act "an creation", which is an requirement for copyright protection. A work must be a unique result of a human expression of an idea or thought in order for it to be copyrightable.

Other sounds from people and such might get covered,
but I thought there had to be some level of human
"expression" to be copyrightable.

There does have to be some expression, and there is some in sound
samples.


A sample of a sound from a car, for example, is not copyrightable. A sample from a piece of music might be copyrightable, the issue is AFAIK very uncertain. It has, among other things, to do with the question of whether a "sound" should or should not be copyrightable. The manner or style in which a piece of music is played cannot be copyright protected. The problem is how to separate the music from the sound. One solution could be to deny the sound copyright protection but allow it to modify the assessment of the level of creativity (or originality) of the piece of music. A highly original sound could then make a less original piece of music copyrightable.

/Peter Brink




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page