Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-sampling - Re: [cc-sampling] a Q about the putting together the final samplinglicense

cc-sampling AT lists.ibiblio.org

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

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Glenn Otis Brown <glenn AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: jcsehak AT rootrecords.org
  • Cc: creative commons license list <cc-sampling AT lists.ibiblio.org>, Don Joyce <dj AT webbnet.com>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-sampling] a Q about the putting together the final samplinglicense
  • Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:50:10 -0700

Thanks for the offer, Josh, but I'd rather we did all the UI mock-ups on our own dev servers, so that we avoid having multiple versions and duplication of effort.

There's another thing to consider about the number of options: The point isn't just that we're creating more web pages, or even more versions of our machine-readable licenses. (Though linking it all up with actual lawyer-readable licenses, and metadata, does take some time.)

The point is also that the more options we have, the less this will be like it's own stand-alone, special, sampling license. It will be the sampling-plus-copy-plus-attribution license, and then the sampling-minus-copy-plus attribution license, etc. etc. That's all.

Thanks for your patience. I promise that when I get I second of air we'll put this stuff out on the list.

Glenn

On Sunday, July 27, 2003, at 05:10 PM, Joshua Csehak wrote:


what I wish. So someone approaching these licenses with a mind to
allow sampling can find EVERYTHING they need in one new sampling
license for this specific purpose without mixing and matching.

Well that can easily be done, but then a second person comes along, and what they need likely
isn't the same as what the first person needed. I think we seem to agree that we can pretty
safely demand attribution and forbid advertisers without too much trouble, but the real kicker
is, (as we've ben talking about it) do you want to make it legal for people to share (or even
sell) your original songs? There's no clear consensus on that. Metallica says no way, but most
indie bands say please do. So if you ever want to get a major-label artist on the bandwagon,
you're gonna have to offer the "sharing is bad" option. But at the same time, we want to
encourage sharing, so we really need to leave that option open.

That can't be too hard, can it? Just one option? I'd be happy to help with the work if need be
(I can design a web page in no time, and can do some back-end coding, if you're using jsp).

How hard it is for us to do aside, I'm not too sure we have to worry about it being complicated
for the end user. We just have to do it right ;) If I have some time, I'll mock it up for you
soon.

best,
Josh

--
root# records
Open Source Music
www.rootrecords.org


_______________________________________________
cc-sampling mailing list
cc-sampling AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-sampling



------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------
Glenn Otis Brown glenn AT creativecommons.org
Executive Director t +1.650.723.7572
(cc) creativecommons f +1.650.723.8440






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page