Re: More Soundtrack

[Dave Fancella <david.fancella@comcast.net>]

On Monday 08 March 2004 05:42 pm, Jens Granseuer wrote:
> > I found an appropriate license for it.  :)  This song is provided under
> > the Open Source License v2, the complete text of which should be embedded
> > in the midi file and can also be found here:
> >
> > http://opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.0.php
> >
> > I assume it's GPL compatible.  If it's not, I'll find one that is.  ;)
>
> Er, you don't have to embed the license text in every midi file, do you? I
> mean, it's no problem as long as we only have few tracks but assuming we
> can increase the number over time... You don't include the GPL in each
> source file, either.

Oh yeah, the license text doesn't have to be embedded in every file, but it 
does have to be included with the distribution, same way you have to put in 
the .cpp files something that says "This is GPL stuff, you should have 
received a copy of the license with the software, if not write to FSF to get 
it".  And in the midi files there does have to be something that says 
something to that effect, of course.

Hm.  Somewhere you suggested Creative Commons for the license.  Maybe that was 
in a personal email.  Anyway, here's my response to that.  ;)

I don't really care what license it's under, as long as it's essentially GPL 
for music, so if you guys have a preferred license for the music, no problem 
there.  This isn't a deal-breaker in any sense of the word.  I just want to 
make sure that people who have the music have the same rights the GPL would 
provide them if it was a program, that's all.  I like the OSL, and I would 
prefer that, but the Creative Commons license isn't significantly different 
(unless a lawyer tells me so, I'm not one), so it's not that big a deal to 
me.  :)

So, if you guys have a preferred license for the soundtrack, now's the time to 
say so.  I'll be making one last pass through the one song we have so far 
soon (hopefully tonight, but no promises), and then I'm declaring it done, 
and whatever license you guys prefer is what I'll put it under (provided it 
satisfies my own requirement that it be GPL for music, essentially, of 
course).

Alternately, I'll be happy to just stick with the OSL while we further discuss 
the matter and make sure the best decision that can be made is made, and then 
anything I've contributed for the soundtrack can be changed.  It's easy when 
there's only one contributor.  ;)

Keep in mind that the same problem with the GPL (and other open source 
licenses) will apply to the music.  That problem is that after many 
contributions, with many contributors each holding copyright over part of the 
work, it can conceivably become impossible to change the license later, if 
such a change is desired.  The Wikipedia has this problem now, since they 
used the Documentation Public License, or whatever it was that was just the 
GPL written for documentation, and now even RMS says that license isn't a 
good one to use anymore.  So, if a change is needed after there are many 
contributors, it's entirely possible the soundtrack would need to be 
rewritten from scratch in order to make the change possible, and nobody wants 
to have to do that.  ;)

My latest random signature is appropriate to the discussion, I think.  ;)  
Fortune rules.

Dave

-- 
Visit my website!
http://www.davefancella.com/?event=em

Some men are heterosexual, and some are bisexual, and some men don't think
about sex at all... they become lawyers.
		-- Woody Allen