Re: [Librefm-discuss] Libre.fm as the central place for obtaining free music

[George De Bruin]

Okay - lots of good discussion in this email chain about licenses,
definitions, etc.  I won't be taking time to answer all of the
messages that quoted my message because I am suffering from some
difficulty with my eyes tonight (particularly one eye that seems to
have a bit of an infection which is making it difficult to see).  But,
I appreciate all the discussion, and especially the references. (More
research for me! Yippee!!)

My only comment to Matt's statement below is to supply an example of
what happens when we remove the NC and ND deeds from the acceptable
licenses.  I just looked at Jamendo (just because they make it easy to
search by license).  Of their catalog of approximately 31,000
releases, only 7,033 releases qualify.  And, additionally, some
netlabels would be completely excluded from such distribution - for
example Kahvi Collective.

I'm not arguing / debating the subject...just supplying some food for thought...

George

On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Matt Lee <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 11:01 PM, address@hidden wrote:
>> The implication of this is copyleft licenses (GPL, CC) are still legally
>> enforceable, meaning that they are not as "free" as something released
>> into the public domain.
>
> We're not here to argue degrees of freedom.
>
> CC-BY
>
> CC-BY-SA
>
> PD
>
> Art Libre
>
> GPL
>
> BSD
>
> LGPL
>
> All fine in this situation.
>
>



-- 
---
Faster moments spent spread tales of change within the sound...