A discussion on Creative commons

[Nikolas]

Heh...

I'm having trouble and I hate myself for not being careful enough!

Here's the full story:

IMSLP (to which I'm a big supporter) has 5 of my scores, in pdf format! It's distributed under "Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike 3.0".

Then I found out that SMA (another sheet music site), has my works as well. The very same 5 ones! Ok, not too bad I thought. ONLY that they charge a subscription fee in order to get to the scores! Which is ugly as it can get! Remember the case with the AGS games on that database list?

Well, it does seem that the guy took the 5 scores from IMSLP and started distributing himself. Problem? CC license ALLOWS him to do that!

And CC license is NOT revocable!!!! Which is only fair. If I have a pdf file which mentions that it CAN be redistributed, they can't take this away from me. There's no way to do that. So it does appear that my 5 scores are screwed!

Good thing that the scores are full of errors... This is something to speak of!

But just in case:

BE CAREFUL. Creative commons is a legal way for your art to (almost) enter public domain, with little to no control over your works!

This thread will be updated, as I'm in the process of getting in touch with the owners of SMA and seeing if they would remove my scores...

[Snarky]

If the works are licensed under a CC non-commercial license, others are not allowed to distribute them for profit. It's section 4(c) of the license:

"You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by means of digital file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to be intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation, provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection with the exchange of copyrighted works."

Traditionally, non-commercial restrictions have permitted a small fee to cover distribution costs (physical media, shipping and handling, etc., in the days when those things were relevant--today it could conceivably cover the cost of hosting and bandwidth), and some licenses specifically exempt such payments. However, I don't see any language along those lines in the CC text. Though I'm not a lawyer, my understanding would be that SMA are in breach of the license.

What you say about CC licenses is not correct. The Creative Commons offer a number of different licenses, and some are quite restrictive and protective, while others are much more open. You should obviously always make sure that you understand the terms of the license you've chosen before you use it.

[Dualnames]

Let me get this straight, you released your scores over Creative Commons, and some site is charging them for money, without you being informed or getting a penny?

[Trent R]

Time to go steal some of Nikolas's music.....


~Trent

[Matti]

I'm sorry to hear that Nikolas, but I think Snarky is right. Regarding the license it's for non-commercial share only and all they do is making money with it.

[Nikolas]

I hope everything goes well, and I have to admit that I'm rather upset... 

snarky: the only "tougher" CC license I see is "Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd)".

The problem, in this case, is that once you give you artwork the CC license you can't really take it back. It's an one way street! And all CC licenses include redistribution! Which is mainly my problem right now (and the fact that the other party has been non responsive).

This thread, apart from my complaints and boo hoo hoos is to inform a little about CC and make sure that people think VERY CAREFULLY about CC (something I didn't do, and it's my fault to begin with).

If I didn't have the CC license on my 5 scores now, I would have every single right to tell the guy to leave my scores out. Now it's kinda gray area...

Anyways, thanks guys!

Dualnames: Yup, exactly that. But in a semi-commercial way. He's not charging to "buy" the scores, but only a subscription fee for ALL the scores.

[Darth Mandarb]

Creative commons or no creative commons this kind of thing is [essentially] un-stoppable on the internet.  "Laws" or not it's the 'net and there will always be those willing to do this type of thing.

It's just the nature of the beast.

If these two sites have your scores I'd wager there are a few others offering 'em up that you don't know about.  Were it me, I'd do nothing about it (as I feel it's a losing battle) but you must fight the fights you deem worth fighting and each of us determines that on our own!

Best of luck though Nic! You know I support you

I hope you get it all sorted out!

[Nikolas]

It's just the nature of the beast.

Love the new font! (btw, why the new font? )

Just a few small points.

The first site has my scores with my blessings, until very recently that is, because I asked them to pull them down until the 2nd site has been sorted.

But the main thing, for me, is this: This is no traditional piracy! I'm offering my scores FOR FREE on the net, for educational purposes, and for the purpose of supporting the "community", regardless of how big it is. I don't mind distribution, etc.

But I certainly mind someone making money out of it.

Can you imagine people selling... open office? It's disgusting! It's that kind of thing I'm having here, I think. 

[SSH]

Can you imagine people selling... open office? It's disgusting! It's that kind of thing I'm having here, I think. 

*cough*

[Darth Mandarb]

]Love the new font! (btw, why the new font? )

No reason ... just thought I'd try something new

But the main thing, for me, is this: This is no traditional piracy! I'm offering my scores FOR FREE on the net, for educational purposes, and for the purpose of supporting the "community", regardless of how big it is. I don't mind distribution, etc.

But I certainly mind someone making money out of it.

Totally understandable!

I wasn't kidding when I said fight the fights you deem worth fighting!  When it comes to me (and my 'stuff' online) I would very rarely attempt to stop the 'sharing' of it.  To me it's like trying to stop a forest fire with spit.  But I openly admit I've chosen battles I knew I wouldn't win before simply because I felt they were worth fighting!

[Misj']

But the main thing, for me, is this: This is no traditional piracy! I'm offering my scores FOR FREE on the net, for educational purposes, and for the purpose of supporting the "community", regardless of how big it is. I don't mind distribution, etc.

But I certainly mind someone making money out of it.

I understand the problem, but there's one question that I have. If some music-magazine would put the sheets in PDF of hundreds of free (under CC license) songs on their cover disc, and one of the songs would have been yours...would you consider that a problem as well? - I mean: the only way to get access to the collection is by paying money (for the magazine/disc), so it's a similar situation. They also make money from the content of the CD (since strong content leads to more magazines sold), so technically they would then make money from your song. I myself would not call that piracy. So how is the situation different form a site that requires subscription to access the content (for free as often as you want, and as many as you like)? - Or would you consider both a form of piracy?

[voh]

What pisses me off most is the prices. 29.95 USD, EUR or GBP? What the hell?

This is what I mailed them. I'm fairly sure I'm not going to get a reply.

Your pricing is *ridiculous*. First off, you're offering FREE music for a PRICE. That alone is loathsome. But in addition to that, you're also ripping both continental Europeans and the British off like there's no tomorrow.

For a yearly subscription, I, a Dutchman, would have to pay nearly 38 USD rather than the 30 an American would pay. A Brit would have to pay nearly 45 USD. That's a 50% increase in cost!

You're making money off of FREE music AND you're discriminating on a monetary level towards non-US citizens.

You disgust me.

I remember getting this pissed off about jerks trying to sell abandonware games on a subscription basis. I don't care how much your hosting costs - you do NOT sell other people's work, or require monetary input before you'll allow them access to it. I don't care how much a person copies - but as soon as you start requiring people to pay for other people's material, you're an a**hole in my book.

Bah.

[Nikolas]

As I said it's not "traditional" piracy. It's not piracy actually. Not exactly anyways.

In both cases, you get something which is offered for free and charge for it (or partially, or insinuate that you need to spend money in order to get it).

I know that the CD game is being done for a long time, but this is a physical copy, so charges could be applied. Plus the old "legal" trick is that the CD is a gift and you only buy the magazine.

legally speaking the CD issue, the website issue, and in general ANY use of copyrighted material (even text actually), without authorisation is wrong. Of course, one can quote someone in a text, but they sure can't use a picture that someone else took, can they? The way that I promote my material, my music, etc, is my own to decide and noone elses under the law (the copyright law). And while, I don't expect to have control over things on the Internet, I try my best to offer as much as possible (btw, there are 2 threads of mine, in the gen gen, with mp3s AND scores (although scores are off line currently), and make sure I don't charge for it. Someone else charging for my work, no matter the % is silly.

Another difference in a CD is that in a CD you get... 10-12 entries, or in a computer games magazine a few spots. You don't get 22,000 pdf files to be amongst. There's not much publicity to a website with so much different material, while being in a CD of "future music", or "computer music", "guitar" or whatever, means you went through a trial (since they don't put anything in, there's a quality check, which also applied to games), and could be considered an honour! (even if I still think it's basically the same thing, if they hadn't asked me in the CD case).

______________________

On another issue, apart from the theoritical talk, I came in contact with the onwer(s) of the website and they have removed my scores and my name from the website, appoligising, etc. They have also offered to host my scores WITHOUT the subscription fee, for anyone to download them for free, which I'm considering.

It could be that I was upset (in the mails I sent), but they seem to realise that what they did was wrong. And they're not some kids from China, it's a dentist and an actor from NJ!

EDIT: Voh, I do agree, although I didn't go to any discussion about money issues. It was not the point of my "hunting them down". But I agree...

[voh]

Oh, I understand that - that was my main frustration upon visiting that site. I understand your frustration but that price thing just ticked me off

Oh well - c'est la vie, can't be helped.

[deadsuperhero]

Regardless of them making money off of your music, the Attribution part of it REQUIRES they say who really made it.

With that in mind, someone who buys your music from this place can at least look up your name, and find your legit stuff!

I license all of my stuff under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License, I'd actually really like to just see people steal my work and profit off of it, it at least means that my work might be worth selling!

In any case, I know my post doesn't solve anything for you, but you can at least take solace in knowing that someone liked your music enough to redistrubute it, regardless of legality.

[RickJ]

Nikolas,

Have you thought of contacting Creative Commons and asking them if this guy is violating the license.  If so they may be willing to help resolve the situation. 

With open source software it is common practice for people to distribute GPL software and charge a fee for making a CD, printed manual, etc and shipping them.  The recipient is, of course, free to redistribute according to the terms of the original license. 

I am not sure if what this guy is doing falls under this category or not.  As you say he is not making physical copies.  However, he is obligated, to distribute exact copies, license and all.  The terms of the CC license should be clearly stated on the document (sheet music) somewhere  as well as a notice that it is being distributed free of charge.  So you could at least be sure to piss off his customers by letting them know that the guy ripped them off.

Btw, here is the Creative Commons contact page.  http://creativecommons.org/contact/

[Dualnames]

I don't suppose it's possible for you to claim those scores or stop their distribution(so you can re-release them with another license)?
I definetely think, that contacting CC might not really help at all. How about contacting the guy? Or releasing the scores with another license then claiming the one he's using as a fake or off-date(seeing too many spy movies)

Sorry if I was just throwing random ideas.