One
who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who
willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the
conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality
expressing the highest respect for law.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
On 03/02/2010 12:16 AM, Blaise Alleyne wrote:
----- Original message -----
> Dne ponedeljek 1. marca 2010 ob 07:04:37 je Matt Lee napisal(a):
> > Let's not forget that free songs are often copyrighted, but
that
> > Libre.fm will never be allowing nonfree materials for
download.
>
> Well, to be strict, all songs with a known author are copyrighted.
Free/libre
> songs are only licensed then with a copyleft license on top of
that.
>
> What did you have in mind here then? Free as in beer songs that
are not
> subject to any free/libre license?
You can "uncopyright" a song by releasing it into the public domain
(e.g. CC0 waiver), and there are non-copyleft free licences (e.g. CC
BY). I think Matt was just trying to clarify that it's not
"copyrighted" music that would raise legal issues, rather it's the free
versus non-free (libre) distinction that's relevant.
It's not quite accurate for us to say "copyrighted" when we really mean
"non-free," but I think we all knew what you meant. Good to be accurate
though.
|