Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Announcing Gnomoradio
From: Daniel James (daniel_AT_mondodesigno.com)
Date: Mon Oct 27 2003 - 12:24:58 EET
> I
> only have a problem with the "non-commercial only" part of some
> licenses (I think, it's only one of the CC licenses), because this
> like "pollutes the environment", that CC also tries to create.
I'm not sure that it does damage the commons. For professional artists
to contribute to the commons, there has to be a safeguard against
loss of livelihood.
Bear in mind that reserving the right of commercial exploitation for
yourself doesn't mean that work can't be commercially distributed -
it just means a prospective commercial distributor would have to have
the artists' blessing to do it, and I don't see what's wrong with
that.
I don't think any musician (professional or otherwise) would put out a
CD if they knew a commercial rival - who hadn't put a cent into
artist wages or album production - could duplicate that CD
legitimately and sell it at a lower price in the same market, perhaps
with better distribution.
Even independent releases by amateur artists have to be paid for, and
just imagine how upset you'd be if your CD became popular and some
label that didn't care about your music made a lot of money on it,
while you couldn't even afford to record a follow-up.
If musicians had been able to preserve this right for themselves,
instead of signing it over to labels, then maybe the record industry
would have been very different. I believe the opera singer Caruso,
who was one of the very first musicans to record, was able to
negotiate a deal where he would get a 10% of retail royalty. I've
heard the standard these days is more like 12% of wholesale before
deductions - so much for a hundred years of progress!
Cheers
Daniel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Oct 27 2003 - 12:25:44 EET