Re: Some topics

[Erik Jarvi <ejarvi megsinet net>]

On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 10:04:40PM -0500, Dan Mueth wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Erik Jarvi wrote:
> > It looks like you can store strings in the headers of a .wav file. I've been
> > reading the RIFF specs. Yikes!
> [SNIP]
> 
> Ok.  If the format supports it, then we need (1) a tool which will allow
> us to insert and edit the strings, and (2) a format for the
> strings.  (2) can be as simple as just "Copyright 2000 Erik Jarvi under
> Open Content License".  Or, it can be a nice XML-based metadata
> system.  I think if we can find a tool which can add or edit a comment in
> a .wav or .au file, even a simple command line script, we would be in good
> shape here.

Nod. I was just messing with python trying to do this, I failed miserably. :0
I got the first 4 bytes read and that about it. Heh. 

If anyone has hints... but it would probably take longer to explain then to
implement it in python. 

One thing, does the recent "you-can't-just-link-to-the-GFDL" effect if
we put the license in or "link" to it?

> > > We could use the Open Content License (http://www.opencontent.org/).
> > > This is an "open source" type license instead of a "free" license, but I
> > > think it is the best option available.  The "free" licenses like the GPL
> > > and the GFDL are not really appropriate for sound/artwork.
> > 
> > I would say that the open content license is akin to the LGPL. And I'm a little
> > uneasy about it. I don't have anything concrete against it, to me it seems
> > vague. I would like to see a Free license for sounds. 
> > 
> > <ego>
> > I wouldn't want any of my sounds to be stolen and end up in a non-Free product.
> > Unless of course I relicense it. ;)
> > </ego>
> 
> If this is important, then my understanding is that the OCL will not be
> acceptable.

It might.  I'm on the fence post. Though, I would prefer to have a GFDL-like
license over the OCL. 


> > Hmm, I was going to "fork" the GFDL, but it's not really forkable, the FSF owes
> > it. Would it be impolite to fork the GFDL and then ask for a blessing?
> 
> I think you should email Richard Stallman about this first.
> 
> I wonder if we could use the GPL.  If the GPL is applicable to sounds
> (which I'm not sure if it is or not), I'm not sure if it actually prevents
> people from using your sound in a proprietary application, provided the
> sound is unaltered.  Looking at the GPL, if the object is not modified, it
> looks like the "source code" can be copied verbatim by anybody provided
> the license is preserved.  So if I am not mistaken, a commercial
> application could ship your sound in its original format along with the
> app and then play it as part of the application.

I see what you are saying. I'm thinking that a GFDL-like license would be
better suited and more legally sound. I guess I'll have to ask the expert. :)

<snip>

> Einsturzende Neubauten - I wonder if they would let us borrow some of
> their sounds for a desktop theme.  We could have a whole line of
> industrial themes :)

Heh, I was wondering if that reference was "too out there", I guess not. :)
Of course it isn't that hard to get some metal from the junk yard... 

<snip>

Erik
-- 
All music aspires to the condition of muzak.