Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Linux Developer Network Starts Publishing Technical Articles

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb.
<brick_n_straw@xxxxxxxxx>
 wrote
on Thu, 4 Sep 2008 20:23:08 -0400
<v2usl7kzzprn.1mm8vz26i3dnz.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:49:18 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> An Open Source Mashup for Amazon EC2
>
> Nobody cares.
>
> Mashup?
> Sounds gay to me.....
>

Think what you will; the term is more along the lines of
combining bits and pieces of various other works into a
derivative work -- mashing them together, if one will.

There are copyright issues involved if the derivative work
is later rebroadcast (for personal use it probably makes no
difference, though posting on YouTube is arguably the same
as more traditional publication, especially if the work is
indexed so that an arbitrary person may find it easily).
The Verve in particular ran into trouble from the Rolling
Stones when the former created Bittersweet Symphony,
a derivative work that included a sample from the Stones.

It's a very dangerous area now, especially since Stephanie
Lenz stands accused of violating Universal's copyrights
(the owner of the song Let's Go Grazy as performed by
Prince, which just happened to be playing in the background
as she was recording her son's antics).

http://www.illegal-art.org/audio/historic.html

http://www.dvdnextcopysupportforum.com/showthread.php?t=4898

The good news (for us, not for the music companies):
the courts have initially found in her favor,
apparently.

The bad news: it's in appeals, and far from done.  Nor is
it all that obvious (at least to me, anyway, without
reading the decision) what "fair use" is; in this particular
case I'd say it was more accidental than intentional.

I consider all of this terribly ... well ... gay, but
both sides do have a point; we don't want willy-nilly
copying of music without at least some recognition
of the creator thereof, nor do we want music to be
so tightly locked down that we can't do reasonable
things with it, especially if it's no more than
background noise in an unintentionally derivative work.
(In Stephanie's case, however, it is *not* background
noise; her son was responding to the music as she was
recording him.)

But where's the middle ground?  Good question.

Welcome to the New World Order.

-- 
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Linux.  Because it's not the desktop that's
important, it's the ability to DO something
with it.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index