Pass this link:

http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000123.html

to everybody you know.

I have mixed feelings about the new Creative Commons Music Sharing license (info here).

As a producer of music who uses samples extensively I want as much music available to ply my trade (legally) as possible. As a world citizen I’d like to see people with a real talent for that make great, explicitly derivative art.

But I also understand that a lot of creative people, especially those with a true talent for composition and performance want to keep some control over who does what to their original artwork.

In the end, having the choice for the artist is the most important thing so I’m really not all that torn — I’m just pretending to be for the cameras. You know, election year posturing stuff.

The fact is, I was begging the CC folks to make the non-derivs license as explicit as possible because I was (and still am) positive that many musicians use the non-derivs license not realizing they are restricting remixes, even non-commercial ones.

Now, between the explicit split between the Sharing license vs. the Sampling license a composer and performer can have little doubt what their choices mean.

I finally had the Create Commons Sampling Licenses explained to me in plain and simple terms by the very helpful and knowledgeable Neeru Paharia, Assistant Director at CC.

Once explained I went back to reread the “mere-mortal” version and, looking back, I’m not sure why I was having issues in groking the language in the first place. (Which makes Neeru’s patience with me all the more admirable.)

Read the rest of this page »