Re: [LAU]

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Rob <lau@...>
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Subject: Re: [LAU]
Date: Sunday, February 24, 2008 - 8:20 am

On Saturday 23 February 2008 20:32, Ken Restivo wrote:

Yet they still don't have the kind of license that I'm looking for:
one directly analogous to the GPL, but for music; one where, while
anyone can use your work for any purpose, derivative works must not
only be licensed under the same license, but have their source
materials (unmixed master recordings, sequencer files, video files,
whatever it takes to "build" the final derivative work) available
under that license as well.

I don't think I'll ever see one like that in mainstream use the way
the CC licenses are now, but it sure would go a long way toward
creating the same kind of spirit in the music community that the GPL
did (over the course of about 20 years) in the software community. At
least nowadays most people have, or should soon have, the bandwidth
necessary to make something like that practical.

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] By-sa (WAS: Re: [OT] Another problem with creative com..., Cesare Marilungo, (Sun Feb 24, 12:34 am)
Re: [LAU] , thomas fisher, (Mon Feb 25, 5:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] , Rob, (Sun Feb 24, 8:20 am)
Re: [LAU] , drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 24, 12:16 pm)
Re: [LAU] , Rob, (Thu Feb 21, 4:10 pm)