Discussion of all things related to Public Domain

[tom poe <tompoe AT amihost.com>]

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 09:54, Andrew Orlowski wrote:
> Thanks for the lead Tom, I'd like to write about this. Can you or 
> your friends help with a couple areas?
> 
> - Licensing is confusing and there has been little attempt to promote 
> Creative Commons license to artists. What are the pros and cons of 
> the options ?
glenn AT creativecommons.org  Glenn Otis Brown is the source!  But, this is
one of those "Glad You Asked" opportunities, and I mustn't let it pass. 
Copyright is automatically applied to all works, as you know.  We don't
have to do anything, don't have to add a copyright notice, don't have to
sneeze.  In the Digital Age, things change dramatically for the better. 
Our world becomes Democratized simply by our ability to use the
computer.  The computer empowers the individual, in the same fashion,
the Gutenburg Press empowered the People.  With that in mind, how might
we sort out copyright licensing for works on the Internet?  Simple. 
Just "tag" it, and make it possible for anyone to identify who the
author/creator is, and contact them regarding the rights available or
not available, arrange for usage through contracts, whatever.  Clean,
simple, straightforward.  Type in Creative Commons as a keyword in your
favorite search engine, and then whatever other keyword comes to mind.

Let's go a little further.  A Creative Commons license encourages
noncommercial use, then adds attribution, then adds share-alike, meaning
it wants the user to continue the same or similar philosophy of
noncommercial sharing.  At some point, a creator can add enough
restrictions that they've essentially relicensed the work in full
copyright language.  It's like a continuum from Public Domain with no
restrictions to full copyright at the other end.  Somewhere in between
we expect to find Reason and Logic and Wholesomeness.   :)

Interestingly, a Creative Commons license extends into perpetuity.  Now,
is this the dream of Valenti, or what?  Just begs the question, "When
will they connect the dots?"  Of course, it's a leading question,
because . . . .

If I use a Creative Commons license, and attach reasonable restrictions,
people will be loyal, buy my products, and life will be good.  If I add
too many restrictions, the Internet/world community will bad mouth me,
and move to some similar product that has reasonable restrictions. 
Lessig and Brown over at Creative Commons calls this "architecture" or
something.

> 
> - Are there moves to peer music between the various hosts? I 
> appreciate this is a technical issue rather than a legal one. I need 
> to investigate,

ANS:  SONG STORM is actually, the first of what is coming down the
pike.  The commercial sites are trying to emulate the RIAA model
requiring artists to sell their downloads under full copyright
protection.  Doesn't work.  SONG STORM uses the reality that music, art
and literature are all about great music, great art, and great
literature.  Great music is timeless, as is great art, as is great
literature.  It would be nice to be able to support oneself along the
way, and that is what can happen with SONG STORM.  People send in their
favorite playlists, and visitors like what they hear, go to the artist's
site, buy the "deluxe" CD's, DVD's and recording merchandise, and the
artist is supported somewhat by this marketing opportunity through their
personal websites.  Fan clubs will also help market, and provide the
product line to raise funds for events, activities, etc.  Performance
rights for the artist are handled through such Digital Age Fan Clubs.

This model sets the stage for a huge, huge explosion of music across the
world.  But, maybe it will be music that competes to be timeless, rather
than bubble-gummy music.  

For now, what is happening, is an awareness that there is less than
satisfactory money being made by independent artists on the Internet. 
There is a large population in our world that needs to be educated to
move towards other forms of music that they're not getting exposed to by
relying on the corporate giants to provide.

The message is simple.  Support independent artists.  Demand quality,
and the best way to do that, is to work hard to discover good music,
then share it with others.  P2P products need to create independent
artist only networks.  They do that easily with "tagging" such as found
with the Creative Commons Project.  Commercial portals for downloading
music have to give way to Open Source solutions/respositories, and shift
their emphasis to playlist contests, make their money off prize
sponsors, and reallocate entertainment dollars through democratization
of the industry.  And, besides, it's a lot more fun.  Quality, and
quantity are the hallmarks for music in the Digital Age.  You can help
make that happen.  

Good luck, and we'll be here when you get back.  :)
> 
> best,
> 
> a
> 
> 
> >`Hi, Andrew:  Your article:
> >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/34009.html
> >Hungover CNET wakes up next to MP3.com
> >By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
> >Posted: 15/11/2003 at 13:02 GMT
> >
> >Was very good.  I've been watching some comments from independent
> >artists on the indiegyrll AT yahoogroups.com list.  There's a lot of
> >confusion about alternatives.  Not many sites to go to.
> >
> >Could you look into how independent artists are moving their works, or
> >if they are, to alternative sites, like www.archive.org ,
> >www.commoncontent.org , www.opsound.org , www.sharedsounds.org , and
> >other commercial sites?  We're ramping up to provide a site that serves
> >the artists, stations, and listeners, called, SONG STORM, a nonprofit
> >project of Open Studios.  We'd like to have people know that, as well:
> >http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/php/testhomeplaylist.php
> >
> >Boston, on another note, has just published the guidelines for
> >protecting their subways from terrorists carrying instruments of mass
> >destruction.  These guidelines all but wipe out independent artists from
> >the subways.  How to remove the competition, the RIAA way.
> >Tom Poe
> >Open Studios
> >Reno, NV
> >http://www.studioforrecording.org/
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Orlowski
> US Editor, The Register