On Tue, 11 May 1999, Kevin wrote:
> OK, so let's assume we drop the Open Content license and use GPL. Can you
> give a good summary of what one is agreeing to when you make your songs,
> MIDI files, lyrics and photographs available under the GPL?
>
> Is it... "I own this material; anybody can use it for anything they want,
> but their modifications have to be available under the same terms."
I think it means something very close to this. Rather than owning material
(information) -- since copyleft does not want to make new arrangements for
"intellectual property" in the Internet age but instead rejects the idea of
IP altogether, as information cannot be owned -- it acknowledges that
copyright exists in an attempt to control users of information.
So if you GPL some data, you are saying something like, "I own the copyright
of this data (i.e., I either originated it or someone else who previously
owned the copyright signed those rights over to me), and I reserve all
rights to it. HOWEVER, I am giving away the right to be the only person who
can copy or modify it; you are free to do this provided all copies and
modifications are also GPLed."
> Could just the original composer, say, sell a CD of his/her version at a cost
> chosen for a good profit (more than distribution costs), and everybody
> else's modified versions have to be "freely" available, like Red Hat Linux
> CDs (if that's indeed the deal for them)?
No. If you want to, you can sell a CD with the Red Hat Linux operating
system on it for $500 each or $5 each or for whatever you like. In fact,
<http://www.cheapbytes.com/> does this to great success -- you can get the
latest Red Hat from them for around $5 each ppd. There is no difference
between theirs and the CD you'd buy from Red Hat (it's still an "official"
Red Hat CD), except you don't get the box and owner's manual and tech
support. Those physical resources are proprietary from Red Hat. (Not that
that's bad, at all; you can't copyleft a physical thing.)
> One could look out for income possibilities supporting the community, and
> providing services to the "user" community (performances, etc.). And I
> think it would be very helpful to at least have a FAQ exploring the
> implications of the licensing for people who come by to check out the
> community.
These are all very good ideas.
How many bands are there making free music right now? I don't think there
are too many. It would be cool to put out a comp disc or maybe do some
shows, if there's a group of free-music bands in close geographic
proximitary.
