[cc-community] on audio content attribution

Evan Prodromou evan at bad.dynu.ca
Fri Apr 29 07:46:14 EDT 2005


On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 10:02 +0200, Fabio Barbon wrote:

> in particular, to be «fair» this should be 
> itself audio only (for example via a voice that reads off composer's 
> name, work title, license adopted (as a jingle?)).

That would probably make your work unique among every musical recording
I've ever heard. That doesn't seem to be "fair" by any standard meaning
of the word.

> 2. this aural attribution (and licensing) information should be 
> «embedded» in every execution (even partial or derivative ones) of my work.

Beethoven doesn't get this kind of attribution. John Coltrane doesn't
get this kind of attribution. Why should you get this kind of
attribution? Is your music so amazingly great that people are going to
be willing to butcher up their derivative works with attribution info
just so they can include your pieces? Because I wouldn't do this for any
art piece.

~Evan

-- 
Evan Prodromou
evan at bad.dynu.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20050429/12188b5a/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 2200 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20050429/12188b5a/attachment.bin 


More information about the cc-community mailing list