Slashdot Mirror

I made a time lapse video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbBfUWq3mU

I used background music from ccmixer
Gave the full attribution too!

Music : Improvisation On Sunday, by Alex Beroza(http://ccmixter.org/files/AlexBeroza/...)
Uses : http://ccmixter.org/files/The3amAssoc... again under the following license.

And got a notice that it matches. I filed a dispute, and haven't heard from them again, and my video is up and running. However, if they had filed a counter claim, they would have taken it down? My account gets a copyright strike? I dunno

anyways, I notified the actual music composer about the claim, and maybe he is also trying to get it removed from their DB.

But its scary, if somebody puts a takedown notice, I cannot seek recourse. I am not in the USA and that makes it even more difficult.

http://ccmixter.org/

Another good site. I've heard a lot of music that I like when I see YouTube videos. It's the label's choice and right to be an idiot. Just like it's my choice and right to stop buying any of their music.

I pay attention to the license. I have a digital name tag that I use at networking events. The audio track for the video on there is under the attribution license. If I ever use any CC licensed music for a money generating project, I will track down the original artist and send them a check. (Well not if they specified non-commercial because I wouldn't consider that track in the first place).

It would be great if the schools responded by setting up a massive file sharing system loaded with public domain, Creative Commons, GPL, and other legal content. There could easily fill it with hundreds of gigs of free legal music. I think pushing free legal non-RIAA music would be an AWESOME way to comply with RIAA demands to combat downloads of their stuff.

Just a few links to get them started:
http://www.dance-industries.com/
http://ccmixter.org/view/media/remix
http://phlow-magazine.com/free-mp3-music-download
http://www.clearbits.net/torrents
http://www.jamendo.com/en/
http://www.archive.org/details/audio
http://newteevee.com/2007/03/03/ten-sites-for-free-and-legal-torrents/
http://newteevee.com/2010/02/05/ten-more-sites-for-free-and-legal-torrents/

and another four or five hundred links:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Content_Directories

-

Thanks for the comments. I'll take them one by one (while I wait for the algorithm to tick over to 250 generations).

1. to give a fair comparison with the hand-picked better sounding loops given in all the subsequent "tasters", the time=zero loops are also hand-picked. Rest assured that most of them sounded pretty horrific. Yes we did set a minimum amount of complexity (I think it was at least 8 different "tracks") in the initial Adam and Eve, but then let them evolve under no selection for a long time.

2. yes we have to keep it short so that rating can happen in this lifetime :-) I have put several tracks together for my own projects (just me doing the ratings, and using pre-recorded samples as well as evolved synths) - here's the best example. I'll probably put something from DarwinTunes together over the holidays (prob using consistently highly rated loops from the slashdot surge)

3. there are no constraints on harmonies or anything, however the "palette" of notes is defined once (all evolved from random) and then the notes are picked from the palette. Mutations to the palette are going to be rare (because defining it takes many fewer "genes" than defining all the music) - hence the good agreement between loops.

4. yep, there have been scientific studies showing herd behaviour in music "selection". The rest of what you say can't be denied, and that's what we're interested in and why we're doing the experiment.

5. no it's real - but I didn't know about the tenori-on, so thanks for the heads up on that :-)

nearly at 250 generations now...

And one more list:

http://ccmixter.org/media/playlist/browse/44

drew

here is a small start:

http://www.kompoz.com/compose-collaborate/viewer.playlist?playlistId=1184&memberId=6509
http://www.jamendo.com/en/playlist/99982
http://www.jamendo.com/en/playlist/113052
http://www.jamendo.com/en/playlist/131695
http://www.joshwoodward.com/music/
http://www.bradsucks.net/music/
http://packet-in.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
http://ccmixter.org/playlist/browse/3464

enjoy

"Most of the "free" music out there comes under the not-so-free Creative Commons non-commercial license. It is semi-free."

Although there might be more than we think. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution
http://ccmixter.org/media/playlist/browse/44

Indeed. So...

2.c. We will seek additional Federal Funding to assist in funding the creation of such Free Licensed music.

How much more of the alphabet will we need?

all the best,

drew

"Most of the "free" music out there comes under the not-so-free Creative Commons non-commercial license. It is semi-free."

Although there might be more than we think. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution
http://ccmixter.org/media/playlist/browse/44

Indeed. So...

2.c. We will seek additional Federal Funding to assist in funding the creation of such Free Licensed music.

How much more of the alphabet will we need?

all the best,

drew

... by releasing your music under a Creative Commons licence and then post it up on http://ccmixter.org/ .

What?! ... you want to not share it and make royalties from your full copyright.

  Cold, Elton... cold.

      To share is human.

boycott the mafiaa bastards
creative commons music is fine, we don't need to be pushed around just to enjoy music!
http://www.garageband.com/
http://www.jamendo.com/en/
http://ccmixter.org/
http://www.last.fm/
http://www.myownmusic.de/

and a link collection (in german)
http://netzpolitik.org/ccwiki/index.php/CC-Musik

> They are a band that 'gets it'

*yawn* ... wake me up when they submit sources for one of their tracks to the creative commons for remixing (at ccMixter.org).

Trent, we get it that you're depressed and all, why not let people REALLY go wild with one of your tracks? It might cheer you up, and all the cool kids are doing it, anyhow:

The Beastie Boys did it.
Fort Minor did it.
Vieux Farka Toure did it.
DJ Vadim is doing it right now.

Why should I bother putting my time and creative energy into remixing your tracks, if I'm legally bound not to post it on my blog, make a music video with it and post it on youtube, or even burn CDs for my friends with it?

Indeed ... NIN / Resnor "almost get it".

> They are a band that 'gets it'

*yawn* ... wake me up when they submit sources for one of their tracks to the creative commons for remixing (at ccMixter.org).

Trent, we get it that you're depressed and all, why not let people REALLY go wild with one of your tracks? It might cheer you up, and all the cool kids are doing it, anyhow:

The Beastie Boys did it.
Fort Minor did it.
Vieux Farka Toure did it.
DJ Vadim is doing it right now.

Why should I bother putting my time and creative energy into remixing your tracks, if I'm legally bound not to post it on my blog, make a music video with it and post it on youtube, or even burn CDs for my friends with it?

Indeed ... NIN / Resnor "almost get it".

> They are a band that 'gets it'

*yawn* ... wake me up when they submit sources for one of their tracks to the creative commons for remixing (at ccMixter.org).

Trent, we get it that you're depressed and all, why not let people REALLY go wild with one of your tracks? It might cheer you up, and all the cool kids are doing it, anyhow:

The Beastie Boys did it.
Fort Minor did it.
Vieux Farka Toure did it.
DJ Vadim is doing it right now.

Why should I bother putting my time and creative energy into remixing your tracks, if I'm legally bound not to post it on my blog, make a music video with it and post it on youtube, or even burn CDs for my friends with it?

Indeed ... NIN / Resnor "almost get it".

> They are a band that 'gets it'

*yawn* ... wake me up when they submit sources for one of their tracks to the creative commons for remixing (at ccMixter.org).

Trent, we get it that you're depressed and all, why not let people REALLY go wild with one of your tracks? It might cheer you up, and all the cool kids are doing it, anyhow:

The Beastie Boys did it.
Fort Minor did it.
Vieux Farka Toure did it.
DJ Vadim is doing it right now.

Why should I bother putting my time and creative energy into remixing your tracks, if I'm legally bound not to post it on my blog, make a music video with it and post it on youtube, or even burn CDs for my friends with it?

Indeed ... NIN / Resnor "almost get it".

{'Well, perhaps it could. If trademark law was taken overboard,'

Well, there is a reason TradeMark and Copyright are different.}

You forget that this is all in the absence of any copyright law (from my point of thinking for this excercise) except where explicitly talking of copyright law.

{'This is just what people say about GPL code / Free Software and yet people do make money from it.'

Yes, but they have other streams in order to make money from [such as Red Hat having a support line and Asterik selling hardware to go with their PABX software]. People who are solely songwriters don't have other means to make money from their songwriting effort.}

I know, but the same hold for people who are exclusively code writers. I am about in that position of being only a songwriter myself (mostly lyrics actually as I can't really sing and don't play an instrument well enough either. I do work sometimes with a friend and sing to him and he tries to figure out from what I am singing what I am trying to sing!!!)

One problem is though is that the idea is out there, the licenses are out there in the wild and people are using them and experimenting with them.

http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

Look around, there are more.

{So, unless there is some other means for them to make money, I don't have a problem with paying copyright royalties to perform their songs. [It's only one cent per performance, and most performers can afford that, even if they perform a concert with thirty to fifty songs, they should be making enough profit off each performance to afford 50 cents or so]. }

The trick is to find that some other means.

Is that how it is were you are? I need to look into it down here. Not that I need to know at this time personally. I do think that in some places it is a percentage of revenue though.

{Like I said, Copyright laws are consistent in what can and can't be copied.}

Perhaps by fiat, but not by some grand ste of consistent principles that anyone has ever pointed out to me or that I have found in all my searching.

Could you copyright a landscaped garden? Why is a cars coachwork not art? After all, at least in bygone days, sculptures of the designs were made before the actual cars were ever produced. This may all be done on computer now.

{The difference here is really in what is considered 'Performance art' and what is static art. It's not an inconsistancy as much as it is a differentiation as to the 'type of art'. }

But in the case of music or video which is recorded and not live, it is not in fact a performance. Not like a band playing a cover is a performance.

BTW - as an odd aside, I wrote a novel in november last year as performance art. I wrote in in an IRC channel on freenode. Some people even dropped in to watch the struggle at times.

The final unedited mess is here:

http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

{It's not legal to claim you wrote something in public domain, but that would result in a plagiarism case. The copying of the work wouldn't consist of a crime, only the claiming it as your own work. }

Gotcha, so you say there is overlap and cases are brought under copyright as it is simpler. In the absence of copyright law though (remember) cases of plagerism could still be brought under the plagersim laws. (I have no reason to doubt you, I have just never read any plagersim laws.)

{If my memory of the 'fake' group of books is correct, they dumbed down the songs to have easier chords/melodies than the original songs.}

So they would be claiming a copyright in the arrangement? What about the original words?

{I think they dumbed down the chords for easier playing. Often they transpose everything for guitar into the key of 'C' as well.}

Dumbing dow

"All the people complaining about DRM should actually DO something"

DONE.

Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954

Tings - Anuddah Bahamian Novel - http://www.ourmedia.org/node/85937 &
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/111123

drew Roberts's Storefront - Lulu.com - http://www.lulu.com/zotz

Some tings for you from zotz : CafePress.com - http://www.cafepress.com/zotz

Now for some other stuff of mine:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zotzbr o&search=Search
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))
http://code.google.com/p/drsoundwall/
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145
http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts
https://sourceforge.net/projects/zbcw

I am not the only one doing such things either. For instance:

http://ccmixter.org/media/tags/attribution

"so CREATE something yourself and see how it works voluntarily instead of forcing authors to agree with your politics."

Ah, I am not the one running to get copyright laws amended over and over. Retroactively. There was a legal (lopitical?) agreement made with the public, but it wasn't good enough for some. They wanted to change the agreement. Now it is wrong for others to change it back to something more like it was? Or even completely different?

Seems some people are trying to force us into new "agreements." Why should we not fight back?

all the best,

drew

Click here to edit this song

Since people seem to be pointing towards their favoriate redistributable music sources, let me point out just one more CC Mixter

As for Carbon Silicon, I don't know. From what I can see, we have an unsigned band with some recognizable members. Since they are unsigned, they have a great deal of latittude in what they can do with their music, so they are using it to promote themselves further. With enough promotion, they may land themselves a deal, and then they will have much less say in how they distribute their music.

I've long been a fan of Mick Jones though. He was responsible for most of the more experimental music from The Clash, and then through the various incarnations of Big Audio Dynamite.

http://ccmixter.org/