Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Sunday 29 May 2005 12:34 am, Mark Ivey wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 00:06 +0100, Rob Myers wrote:
> > > This is why I wanted to limit the initial discussion to digital
> > > music. If we
> > > can't get anywhere with such a limited area, we have no hope with
> > > the rest.
> > > If we get somewhere useful, the process may lead to insights when
> > > we come to
> > > consider other areas.
> > >
> > > Does this idea make sense to anyone?
> >
> > Require the original sequencer file and samples. See NIN's Garageband
> > release of one of their songs for a good example. Scans of the napkin
> > the lyrics were written on wouldn't hurt.
> >
> > The file should be an open format wherever possible.
> >
> > I know requiring editable sources, or source material, for cultural
> > works may seem silly, but the potential it could release would be far
> > greater than just allowing sampling.
>
> I agree that the potential is great, simply because it opens up so many
> more options for how a work can be reused.  I'm also glad Drew spoke up,
> as I was able to find the beginning of this thread.
>
> The GPL says "the source code for a work means the preferred form of the
> work for making modifications to it."  This seems like a reasonable
> starting point and would certainly retain the most flexibility for
> anyone wanting to make modifications.
>
> Although I think it is cool (really cool) that NIN released their track
> for Garageband, it wouldn't count as "source" under the GPL definition.
> Trent said he converted the files from Pro Tools and reduced their sizes
> (the garageband download is 20 tracks in 70 Mb from what I'm reading),
> so it is no longer the format or quality which was used to create the
> real track.  Trent also mentioned there were some copyright issues,
> although it wasn't clear what they were.
>
> This example actually suggests several fairly large problems with a GPL-
> style definition:
>
> 1) The original source material for music tracks is going to be huge.  I
> think wav files are about 70 Mb for 7 minutes.  Even with only 4 tracks
> (guitar, bass, drum, vocal) that's 280 Mb

It sure will be, but flac could reduce it some. For hosting, check:

http://www.archive.org/
http://www.ourmedia.org/

BitTorrent may help in some way as well.

I also wonder if it may be possible to have ogg and wav versions of the 
multitrack project files. Get the ogg version for experiments, then get the 
wav version if you think you made something worth while and want to release.
>
> 2) The tools being used can be very expensive.  The software itself can
> be pricey:
>    Pro Tools: $350
>    Fruityloops: $150
>    Reason: $500
> And that's not counting any needed hardware.  I have a friend who makes
> dance music and he has thousands of dollars of gear.  Even if he gave me
> his source material and all the software, it wouldn't be worth much
> unless I had the same gear he has.

I am not into the windows/mac side of things, but the Free Software world is 
getting some nice tools together:

http://linux-sound.org/
http://ardour.org/
http://www.hydrogen-music.org/
http://jackit.sourceforge.net/
http://jamin.sourceforge.net/en/about.html
http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/

There is much more available.

Free just seems to make sense in so many areas.
>
> 3) If the source material isn't owned by the creator, it isn't clear if
> they are even allowed to distribute it.  For example, if the original
> samples in a song are from a stock sound library, I don't think the
> composer would be allowed to distribute them.  The GPL handles this by
> saying all the included sources must also be licensed under the GPL, but
> I don't know if that makes sense for music.

This is a valid issue, but it can prevent the release of the musiciaans work 
under some of the existing CC licenses as well from what I gather.
>
> It seems like the only way around #1 and #2 is to release sources in a
> format far removed from what the composer actually used, which certainly
> lessens their usefulness.
>
> -Mark Ivey-

all the best,

drew
-- 
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22drew%20Roberts%22