Re: [linux-audio-user] Specifying the license when posting music?

Shayne O'Connor wrote:

> Brad Fuller wrote:
>
>> Shayne O'Connor wrote:
>>
>>> Lee Revell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 20:35 +0100, tim hall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If we are going to assume CC status for works posted here
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IANAL but I am almost positive that would not hold up in a US court.
>>>> Creative works default to "All rights reserved", which includes
>>>> anything
>>>> posted to this list without a specific license attached, regardless of
>>>> what the informal list policy is.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> just in the interests of clarifying something (i doubt it will serve
>>> much practical purpose here):
>>>
>>> it is agreed that, in the absence of any other licensing
>>> information, that creative works will default to "All rights
>>> reserved" ... but out of interest, does posting a link with explicit
>>> permission to download (ie copy) a song, give up any copyrights *in
>>> that instance* ? because you are, in effect, lifting some of those
>>> implied copyright restrictions (otherwise it would be against the
>>> law to make a copy of it, wouldn't it?).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> One needs specific authorization from the copyright owners (both from
>> composers and the ones who own the sound recording) to distribute or
>> reproduce copyrighted recorded works.
>>
>> IANAL either, but I would propose that if you posted a message to a
>> specific group (not the world) and indicate that they are allowed to
>> download a piece, you are in fact giving them the option to listen to
>> your piece for free. But, they don't own the piece. There is nothing
>> implied in the act of allowing them to listen to it that indicates
>> they can transfer the piece to someone else. Because, they don't have
>> the right -- only the copyright owner does.
>>
>
> just want to make clear - i'm not talking about giving up
> ownership/authorship/licensing fees ... i'm talking about sharing
> music, as in "am i allowed to keep this in my shares folder when using
> soulseek/amule/etc? am i allowed to aggregate/distribute it along the
> lines of RadIO or Commontunes.org?".

Ah....Well..
I think it's pretty straightforward, depending on what the copyright
holder(s) state in the email posting.
If the copyright holder of a work states that the work can be downloaded
and listened to, (without stating anything further, which is what we are
talking about right? -- i.e. the default), I believe that the copyright
holder is giving you the right to do so. That means the copyright holder
is allowing you to listen to the piece to your heart's content --- which
would include placing it on your hard drive or a CD and listening to it
in a private setting. And, if the copyright holder doesn't state
anything else, he is offering his work for free.

However, that does not mean that the copyright holder is giving you
permission to distribute the work in any way - that means giving the
work to others, putting it on an Internet server for others to listen to
(e.g. Internet radio), putting it on bittorrent to be propagated, taking
it to a bar and playing it for others, copying the music and making your
own recording of it (you could potentially get mechanical rights, but
not rights to the composition), etc.

brad

-- 
Brad Fuller
(408) 799-6124
** Sonaural Audio Studios **
(408) 799-6123  West San Jose
(408) 799-6124  Cambrian
________________________________
Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com