Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Sunday, February 17, 2013 - 10:13 pm

On Thursday 14 February 2013 09:27:40 James Harkins wrote:

Sorry, perhaps I lost sight of the fact what it was you who stated that
earlier.

To speak to this properly, we need to specify if this is a private, as yet
unpublished work or if it is a currently published work.

If it is not published, I have no right to do anything with it whatsoever. I
am most likely not even aware of its existenace unless you are trying to
raise the money you want before you then make it public.

If it is published, I do not think that decency calls for me to ask
permission. The law may currently require it but we are setting that aside.

My own working thoughts on the matter at this point go something like this:

If I start to earn more than my going rate somehow making use of your work, I
will voluntarily split the extra with you. (Again, not copyright law in play
here. Or sya with a work someone has under a Free license.)

>

Whereas I prefer to release all of my "sources" up front and under a Free,
copyleft license. I want to make it easy for people to get on with it as soon
as they may be insrpired.

> But if I

If you use BY-SA, you can be sure I will be sharing alike. That is my
preferred license for my lyrics and such. (With no copyright law in the
world, you would just find my work.)

See, I don't think we should have a criminal law to stop people being simply
rude. We can have social costs, sure. But criminal costs?

> And the original

See, no. If his bok say is sitting on lined paper that he wrote it on in a
drawer beside his bed, they have no right to it whatsoever. And that means
even if they break in and take possession of it.

> Since

Well, no, They stole the only copy of work. There is recourse.

> Further, she SHOULD have no recourse because any recourse is an

Can you spell it out exactly?

So the folks who wrote West Side Story did something dishonourable? If not,
what exactly are you saying? (Remember we still have copyrights and contracts
set aside, although I am not sure we need to leave contracts aside.)

> and

Unless we craft a law that forces someone to publish before they are paid for
their labour, how do we disempower those who do honest, hard work?

And just to be clear, honest, hard work does not deserve a guuantee of being
paid for by others. If, for instance, I go out onto a deserted public beach
and spend a week working hard in the hot sun digging a football sized hole
three feet deep, I may indeed have done honest work. It may have been hard
work too. Who should I demand pay me for that honest and hard work?

It is only if I set out to work at the behest of another and for an agreed
upon rate that I can reasonably demand payment from that person for the act
of working on what hey asked me to work on.

If I set out to work for myself on my own initiative and make something that I
like, I have my own reward. I have what I made. If someone gets wind that I
have this and they wnat it, they can buy it from me at an agreed upon price.

> and I'm afraid that the discussion cannot progress as long as

Wait. From the license you already use (and so do I by the way) you already
give an indication that asking is not needed.

> I don't have

It is simply to point out that even the current way out laws on the books do
not satisfy those who demand copyright work in the way they insist to protect
their way outdated business models.

> and I intend to ignore

No need to ignore me if you really want to first come to an understanding and
then to explore where we really agree and where we really disagree.
Sometimes, these things take a bit of back and forth.

all the best,

drew

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

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

Messages in current thread:
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, James Harkins, (Thu Feb 14, 2:28 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 10:13 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Thu Feb 14, 9:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 12:25 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Fri Feb 15, 2:19 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 3:12 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Rustom Mody, (Fri Feb 15, 5:06 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 6:58 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 9:04 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Fri Feb 15, 2:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, michael noble, (Fri Feb 15, 3:18 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 11:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 10:43 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 10:44 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Simon Wise, (Fri Feb 15, 7:42 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 7:45 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Al Thompson, (Fri Feb 15, 7:13 am)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, drew Roberts, (Sun Feb 17, 10:26 pm)
Re: [LAU] Changed: Copyright laws and such, Louigi Verona, (Fri Feb 15, 7:31 am)