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

[David meme <david AT locarecords.com>]

> Round and round is good. We have time. Discussion is fine.
>
> Like I said, I'm happy to take all these names to the team, and I'll do
> so on an ongoing basis.


Yes but if we are all spending time discussing names and then they are 
just taken to a team who pick one then it is hardly a legitimate and 
participatory method of choosing the name. Why not start to narrow the 
field, or somehow allow us to take stock of what we are talking about, 
otherwise this is starting to resemble a talking shop that gives the 
*impression* of participation but lacks any real power.

It certainly makes me wonder what the point of contributing if there is 
no end in sight and newbies start us right at the beginning again.. 
There surely needs to be some structure to how we are forming some kind 
of consensus or decision..

Indeed, there are multiple levels to this discussion, my understanding 
(possibly misplaced) was that we were able to not just *influence* with 
its implications of a small group of technocratic 'experts' distilling 
the ideas into 'sensible' solutions. But more radically we could 
direct, write and hey maybe even name the license so that it reflected 
the needs and wishes of musicians rather than lawyers... and who is 
best to make the decisions if about a license that is for musicians to 
use... not the lawyers thats for sure!

And that's not to say I disagree with discussion, its just 
unstructured, never ending, non-chaired, round and round discussion 
that I have a problem with...

David meme


--------THE OPEN SOURCE RECORD LABEL--------

L O C A   R E C O R D S
Stick to What You Don't Know™

        http://www.locarecords.com