linuxaudio.org

Hartmut Noack wrote:

quoted text
>

> You state, that to respect authorship is naive/nonsense/pointless

> because there are so many people out there, that do not care for it.

>

> right?

> 

Not quite. I feel strongly that as there are so many people who remix

with unlicensed samples it is pointless to expect everyone to get

permission before doing so. It's also highly impractical in many cases.
>

quoted text
>

>

>>> Again: there are more methods that those,

>>> that incorporate published recordings of others, to make music.

>>>

>> And your point is ....?

>

> You speak of "artists" as if  *every* artist or at least

>  a vast majority of musicians needs samples to make music.

I don't remember suggesting that. You have perceived my comments that way.
>

quoted text
>> It's a complete PITA and generally completely unnecessary step. It's an

>> ideal that is not required in the real world unless you intend to sell

>> or otherwise profit from the product in amounts that would catch the

>> attention of the license holder.

>

> Now for the last time:

>> completely unnecessary

> For you, but not for those,

> whose work you use to present yourself as an artist

> if you incorporate the work of others WHITHOUT mentioning

> them at all - didnt you get all the credit of the listener and

> those other get absolutely nothing and

>

> do you think, that is cool and decent?

I don't give a !!! If an artist wants to remix someone else's work then

they should be free to do so. If they want to sell it without clearing

the license then they should expect to hear from a lawyer.
>

quoted text
>

>>> Fetch MSWindows, get MAGIX Music Maker and klick your hit!

>>> This is the ideal method for people, that do not care about the origin

>>> of music.

>> What a load of !!!

>>

>> You can use any software designed for music manipulation.

>>

>> Are you suggesting that only artists who care about getting express

>> permission to incorporate other peoples licensed work are allowed to use

>> open source software?

>

>

> everybody may use open source software for whatever

> everybody may want to do - i do not speak about licenses.

>

> Stuff like Music Maker is designed for people, that simply want to

> consume something whithout bothering too much about its origin.

So now you are suggesting that a remix is a nearly pointless exercise

done by someone who is incapable of technical expertise with more

advanced audio software?
> And yes! the whole concept of open source is the opposite of leeching

quoted text
> - - it is respectfull collaboration for mutual advantage

> and public interest.

> 

So now a remix is leeching as well as thievery and to top it off highly

immoral and a reflexion of an inferior personality?
This is great. I'm looking forward to finding out more about the level

of musical snobbishness that abounds in this community.
--

Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.

Http://www.boosthardware.com

Http://lau.linuxaudio.org - The Linux Audio Users guide

========================================
"Anything your mind can see you can manifest physically, then it will

become reality" - Macka B