Development of the Creative Commons Sampling license (or license option)

[Don Joyce <dj AT webbnet.com>]

Title: Re: [cc-sampling] where Sampling will fit in the over

Responses below,

DJ

> > This is a basic question, but i'll
> ask it for clarification's sake:
> > Almost
> > all of the conversations have focused on audio, but I assume that
> these
> > licenses would apply equally to video, print, etc, right?
>
> Right, we want it to be cross-media. Which is part of what makes it
> hard,
> but fun, too.
>
> The complications here arise from the fact that we're
> > allowing commercial application usage (ie derivative works that
> can be
> > sold), but not usage for advertising that implies endorsement of
> a
> > product
> > or idea. Just wondering if there's any precedent for this type
> of
> > distinction.
>
> That's exactly the complication. I don't know the answer to your
> question
> off the top of my head but can look into it.

DJ - If it's ever been a distinction, it's never been publicized that I know of. This, we might say, is an evolution in distinctions I hope we can accomplish, regardless of actual effectiveness out in the real world - which is even harder but even more fun.

While we're on the subject, and since you hint at it, let me ask the
people in favor of an anti-advert clause: Would you be okay with a
nonprofit corp using your stuff in a commercial? Would you be okay with a
university using it? What about if they were doing it for fundraising
purposes?  How about a politician?  Would you be okay with your song
being sampled in film score that played in a film right at the moment the
main character made a shameless product placement plug (think Mike Meyers
& Austin Powers)?  What if your song were used in fundraising materials
for a nonprofit -- advertising or not?

 

DJ - Your examples will occur, and a rule for payment/permission in any re-use by advertising will not prevent any of these institutions form using my song; they simply have to ask me first. If I don't approve of the politician or what the non-profit is up to, I can decline their ulterior motives. If I like them, it'll probably fly to use my song in this particular propaganda. Each case a decision for the source artist/owner decided on it's own merits, only possible under default no re-reuse conditions. "Censorship" there too, for sure, but that's because we get to censor advertising and not art. That's the way it is now, payment and permission for advertising to re-use anything, and for good reasons in that case. Yes, a new re-use distinction between the rights of art and the rights of advertising is now being made, maybe for the first time in law.

In law, this potential (or as I say, necessary) speech rights distinction between art and ads has been all screwed up by the ruling that corporations are considered individuals as far as speech rights go. considered by whom??? Corporate advertising is simply anything but an individual (!) yet they get to defend their "free speech" rights (and presumably, this right of reuse) on the same basis as any individual citizen would. Ridiculous. Who's paying for this?

I'll take the Mike Meyers scenario in stride every time. I simply wont object in the real world, and few would, as there is a level of micro-management in the pursuit of any law that is found to be counter productive to any sane philosophy of real life where anything can happen and usually does. This is what I would expect a good judge to say as he dismisses the case as trivial.

It's just that this movie magic is only going to happen maybe once in a creative individual's lifetime, and not some big threat to base our specific wording around. So let's not stipulate this license's total theoretical range of application in every conceivable situation; ("consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds") get one that does the right thing in most cases, and believe me, no one will decry the few and far between esoteric legal snags that crop up, and after all, these are what may keep our overstuffed legal profession in court with productive work to do...

   

DJ

>