Richard Stallman reckons that most musicians don't make money by selling
music -- their record companies do. Musicians are expected to make
money from performances. If musicians GPL their music, it is out of the
hands of manipulative promoters, and they don't earn any less, because
they weren't getting any money back from record sales anyway. In fact,
musicians might make money through free distribution channels by taking
micro-payment donations, when such a technology becomes possible.
If pepsi use your GPLd music, what's the downside? Your music gets a
wider audience - if you didn't want that you wouldn't have released it.
If you don't like pepsi, you can take their GPLd advert and turn it into
a strongly anti-pepsi message, by interjecting photos of the unborn
children suited pepsi fatcats undoubtedly slay between rounds of golf.
Uninspired music is bad music. Inspired music can only happen with
inspiration from others work. Just because I have written something, I
don't feel like I own it, because I have drawn from my influences,
either conciously or sub-conciously. I would hate for my work to be
misattributed, but if my music can be free to be shared and free to be
influenced and improved by others, then it's more alive and better.
Alex
--
http://www.slab.org/
Every time I say this I know this time I mean it but this feeling deep
inside says that it's ok one more time.
