Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Michael Nottebrock <lofi AT freebsd.org>]

Mike Linksvayer schrieb:
> On Sat, 2006-09-16 at 03:56 +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>   
>> This is about music released under *-*-noderivs. Do downloadable
>> (podcasted) dj mixes (where one piece of music is usually crossfaded
>> into another, played at a different pitch than the original and the
>> pieces are usually not played in their entire length) constitute a
>> collective work or a derivative work?
>>
>> If they are considered a derivative work, would playing the
>> noderivs-pieces of music at their original pitch, without
>> crossfading/mixing and in their entire length make it a collective work?
>>     
>
> Here's what http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Podcasting_Legal_Guide says:
> [...]
Yes, I found that document as well. The thing of the matter is, however,
a DJ mix is well short of creating bastard pop (mash-ups) and
technically, most podcasts do substantially alter the music they include
at data level (through compression, normalizing, equalizing, talking
over) as well. Now while I do have little doubt that podcasting is
probably something that is meant to be encouraged rather than made
difficult by CC licensing, and I also think that a musician choosing
"noderivs" as part of their license is mostly concerned with preventing
sampling and "bootleg"-remixes and not so much any of it appearing in a
DJ set (after all, especially electronic dance music is, if anything,
made *for* being part of a DJ set), the license and all explanatory
documents I have found so far do leave me in a bit of a limbo.

-- 
   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi AT freebsd.org
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org