2007/5/15, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
How about:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/legalcode with 4. d.
added saying:
You may not publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally
perform the Work except as part of the game and you may not
On Tue May 15 17:25, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
But one question:
Do those license terms allow the songs to be distributed in a separate
Debian package from the primary fretsonfire package?
No, it will have to be amended to allow this as was suggested elsewhere
in this thread.
What if the
2007/4/27, Jason Spiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/4/27, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] How about using:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd-nc/1.0/legalcode with 4. d.
added saying:
You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
publicly
El jueves, 26 de abril de 2007 a las 16:25:40 -0400, Jason Spiro escribía:
I have dropped Tommi, Sami and Joonas from the Cc because I don't think
they want to be bothered too much with this kind of things, and only care
about the results. Feel free to correct me if that isn't the case.
*
On Thu Apr 26 21:16, Jason Spiro wrote:
I don't know much about how to write licenses, and this is the first
one I have ever written. I figured that everything after the subject
to the following conditions: would automatically override the initial
permissions I gave. I guess I was wrong?
2007/4/27, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu Apr 26 21:16, Jason Spiro wrote:
I don't know much about how to write licenses, and this is the first
one I have ever written. I figured that everything after the subject
to the following conditions: would automatically override the
2007/3/28, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue Mar 27 20:54, Jason Spiro wrote:
2007/3/27, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could
On Thu Apr 26 16:25, Jason Spiro wrote:
Copyright (C) year copyright holders
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
a copy of this work (the Work) to use, modify, copy, publish,
distribute, publicly perform, and/or sublicense copies of the Work,
and/or to
Hi Matthew,
2007/4/26, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu Apr 26 16:25, Jason Spiro wrote:
Copyright (C) year copyright holders
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
a copy of this work (the Work) to use, modify, copy, publish,
distribute,
Terry Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
Apparently, if you *haven't* signed with any collecting agencies, these
folks automatically get the right to collect royalties for you.
[...] it stinks to high heaven -- it's one of the political
doublespeak moves where you create an organization
Jason Spiro wrote:
2007/3/28, Andrew Donnellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/28/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which
you
have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Ouch. As was
On Tue Mar 27 20:54, Jason Spiro wrote:
2007/3/27, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could modify the MIT license) we could
get Teosto to agree on more
* Don Armstrong:
Well, it actually seems rather strange to me for an organization which
is designed to protect artists disallowing artists from determining
how their own works are licensed,
This is common practice for organizations that collect royalties on
behalf of composers. If you want
On 3/28/07, Andrew Donnellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/28/07, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it actually seems rather strange to me for an organization which
is designed to protect artists disallowing artists from determining
how their own works are licensed, so I'm trying
On 3/28/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which you
have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Ouch. As was indicated earlier this seems standard for all performance
rights organisations.
--
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew
Donnellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On 3/28/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which you
have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Ouch. As was indicated
2007/3/28, Andrew Donnellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/28/07, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which you
have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Ouch. As was indicated earlier this seems
Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that's the contract you have to sign to be part of Teosto (which you have
to do if you ever want to make a living in Finland as a musician).
Please, ask Finland's *legislators* if the situation there is really
that anti-competitive closed shop. I've
We have a question about the default songs for the guitar-simulation
game Frets On Fire. (We would like to get the songs into main if
possible; otherwise, into contrib or non-free. But we need to satisfy
the Finnish music licensing organization Teosto. The full original
thread is at
First off, thanks to all involved for working through this; legal
stuff is annoying, but getting it right early makes it all worthwhile
in the end.
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
We have a question about the default songs for the guitar-simulation
game Frets On Fire. (We would like to
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could modify the MIT license) we could
get Teosto to agree on more liberal terms than we would get if
Teosto wrote one?
The following is what I would use if
2007/3/27, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jason Spiro wrote:
Maybe if debian-legal or I wrote the license (I have never written a
license before, but maybe I could modify the MIT license) we could
get Teosto to agree on more liberal terms than we would get if
Teosto
22 matches
Mail list logo
