Klarinet Archive - Posting 000017.txt from 2002/02

From: "Kevin Fay" <kevinfay@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] "Copyleft" Concept
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 15:06:55 -0500

Don Yungkurth posted:

<<<There has been frequent discussion on Klarinet about copyright. New
Scientist Magazine has begun using the copyleft concept as an alternative
for some articles. If interested, see:

www.newscientist.com/hottopics/copyleft

Be sure to click on "read on" to get the bulk of the article.>>>

This is an interesting article. It doesn't limit the discussion of
"copyleft" to the usual world of computer software, noting the example of
the "open cola" experiment. It discussed the application of the "open"
business model to other areas of expression, too; the distribution of the
recorded music through copyleft (under an "Open Audio License") brings it
into the scope of this list.

The article contained the following observation:

"It's also not clear why any mainstream artists would ever choose to release
music under an OAL. Many bands objected to the way Napster members
circulated their music behind their backs, so why would they now allow
unrestricted distribution, or consent to strangers fiddling round with their
music? Sure enough, you're unlikely to have heard of any of the 20 bands
that have posted music on the registry. It's hard to avoid the conclusion
that Open Audio amounts to little more than an opportunity for obscure
artists to put themselves in the shop window."

In response to Don' post, Tony Pay added:

<<<Hooray!!!>>>

I've purchased a few of Tony's CDs (very nice recordings, btw, esp the
Mozart on the period basset), and quite willingly paid money for them.
Can't help but ask the question:

Tony -- will your future recordings be distributed under copyleft? If not,
why?

kjf

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------