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

[Jon Phillips <jon AT rejon.org>]

On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 11:39 -0700, g. thomas furgerson wrote:
> Creative Commons,
> 
> A new development arose just the other day with the release of Trent 
> Reznor's (Nine Inch Nails) GarageBand mix of Nine Inch Nails' "Hand 
> That Feeds"  project.

Whoa, this is brilliant to release all the mother formats for tracks. It
is interesting to think that what we hear on a final CD/mp3 is a
compressed version that is a composite of so many different layers and
snippets. If all these pieces were made available with media, I think
that the public would be able to learn various artistic practices easier
with this demystification.

> I don't know if this has been addressed or proposed, but a modified 
> "Sampling" license may be in order.
> 
> The sampling license needs to let "listeners" explicitly understand how 
> samples and loops in their project mixes (not just the final piece, but 
> the pieces) may be used in and outside the project from which they're 
> enclosed.  This is different from "sampling" just a song, or part of a 
> song.  The project has midi and live performances, Apple and ACID loops 
> and "one shot" samples.  Each element can can be accessed individually 
> from a project.  And rather than having to put a license on each 
> "piece" of the puzzle, it would be much easier to have a blanket 
> license over all the pieces.  (Read the restrictive license that's 
> presented when opening the NIN project file.)

Totally agree.

> This will become much more necessary in the future, as more artists 
> embrace fans "remixing" and "reusing" their creative ideas by providing 
> their tracks as GarageBand mixes, especially as more users jump into 
> using iLife.  (Not to mention the Karaoke type uses when you can drop 
> the lead vocals out.)

But, at the same time, do current creative commons licenses not support
this? And, is there a need? Would the master files ("mother format")
that are used to compose a derivative, (usually called the original), be
considered the originals? Or, are these original mother formats the
original files? Maybe this does not matter, and it is what work you
designate with a license?

> Just some thoughts.  ( I envisioned this years ago when ReBirth and 
> then Reason came out, but that was before Creative Commons.)
> 
> Creative Commons should also approach Apple about putting an easy 
> "button" into iLife apps and other creative apps to add a Creative 
> Commons and Copyright license tags directly into a project, document, 
> song file or webpage.
> 
> Okay, I'll send the suggestion to Apple myself, but I think the 
> organization or Mr. Lessig would open more ears (Jobs) to the idea.

Yes, this is a great idea. We are implementing a PUBLISH button in our
next release of Inkscape (www.inkscape.org), an Open Source SVG drawing
tool, that does what you speak.

Also, our tool already allows people to quickly select a creative
commons (among others) license and embed it into files edited with
Inkscape.


-- 
Jon Phillips

USA PH 510.499.0894
jon AT rejon.org
http://www.rejon.org

Inkscape (http://inkscape.org)
Open Clip Art Library (www.openclipart.org)
CVS Book (http://cvsbook.ucsd.edu)
Scale Journal (http://scale.ucsd.edu)