Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - [cc-licenses] SoundExchange, 2.5 and 3.0 licenses

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Liz Berg <lizb AT wfmu.org>
  • To: cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [cc-licenses] SoundExchange, 2.5 and 3.0 licenses
  • Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 11:33:55 -0400 (EDT)

For clarity, it seems as though the CC 2.5 licenses (by-nc and by-nc-nd) address the issue of performance and mechanical royalties in more explicit terms than the equivalent 3.0 licenses.

From what I gather, an artist who uses a CC 2.5 by-nc license cannot
collect royalties from a performance rights society, music rights agency, or SoundExchange unless their work was used for a commercial purpose. But please correct me if I'm wrong about that.

The 3.0 license, on the other hand appears to be more vague about this issue, breaking it down under more general terms: non-waivable and waivable compulsory license schemes, plus voluntary license schemes. In this 3.0 license, it appears as though there is one case where an artist may still collect royalties on a non-commercial use of their work: if they are bound by a non-waivable compulsory license scheme.

What are some examples of a non-waivable compulsory license scheme? And where do SoundExchange, performance rights organizations, and music rights agencies fall under these 3.0 classifications?

If I set up a non-commercial web stream that exclusively plays CC 3.0 music, will I owe royalties to SoundExchange? How about if that stream exclusively plays CC 2.5 music?

Any help or insight would be much appreciated, thanks!

-Liz




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page