ASCAP VS CREATIVE COMMONS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

All Rights Reserved

Bjorn Wijers wrote:
> Excuse me, but could someone explain what the acronym
ARR stands for?
> 
> drew Roberts wrote:
>> I have been pondering the possibilities of putting
BY-SA works up with 
>> collection agencies for a whaile now.
>>
>> Would it be possible for the CC licenses to have a
clause that states that if 
>> you use the work and the work is with a collection
agency, then you can 
>> either pay as per your agreement, or you must make
individual exemption 
>> claims for each use? Assuming you are an entity
wich would need an agreement 
>> with said agency.
>>
>> The example I am thinking of is a radio station
that plays ARR and CC works. 
>> They can frget the hassle and pay to use the Free
works, or they can report 
>> the individual uses and claim an exemption for
them? Something like that.
>>
>> I haven't thought this all through yet, but it
seems like a decent time to 
>> bring up the thought for people to discuss / chew
on.
>>
>> Of course, this would only apply to BY and BY-SA
works with respect to 
>> commercial uses.
>>
>> all the best,
>>
>> drew
>>
>>
>> On Thursday 21 December 2006 09:20 am, Fred
Benenson wrote:
>>> Fascinating. Such Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
here.
>>>
>>> ASCAP seems to be missing the point that
Creative Commons builds on top of
>>> copyright, and while Lessig's books are
copyrighted, so is virtually every
>>> other cc-licensed object. All it does is
explicitly define what rights the
>>> artists are looking to preserve beyond
copyright.
>>>
>>> Another piece of FUD here: conflating
"music" (one track) with "music"
>>> (your oeuvre). In other words ASCAP makes it
appear that if you decide to
>>> go for CC once then you must license *all* your
work under CC forever. This
>>> is plainly not the case as cc licenses apply to
individual works and they,
>>> too, are non-exclusive, just like ASCAP claims
to be. Which leads to
>>> another confusing point by ASCAP: it would seem
that collecting royalties
>>> under via ASCAP with a CC licensed track (BY-NC
perhaps?)  would be
>>> something they'd object to, when, as far as I
can tell, since they're both
>>> non-exclusive licenses, it wouldn't be a
problem.
>>>
>>> Still, interesting that they're resorting to
the ole' FUD line then
>>> anything else. That means we must be doing
something right.
>>>
>>> F
>>>
>>> PS: Can I forward this to the
cc-community/cc-licenses list?
>>>
>>> On 12/21/06, Elizabeth Stark <estarklaw.harvard.edu> wrote:
>>>>  <-----Original Message----->
>>>>
>>>>> From: Benjamin Sisto
>>>>> Sent: 12/20/2006 11:50:25 PM
>>>>> To:
>>>>> estarklaw.harvard.edu;wilbankscreativecommons.org;driscollkevin
>>>> gmail.com;thwangfas.harvard.edu;antalliancegmail.com
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [POSSIBLE SPAM] ASCAP VS
CREATIVE COMMONS
>>>>>
>>>>> Round one, fight!
>>>> >From board.lemmingtrail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Benjamin,<-------- (not me, ben
sisto..someone else)
>>>>>
>>>>> ASCAP, BMI and SESAC are all Performing
Rights Organizations (PRO's).
>>>>> The
>>>> basic
>>>>
>>>>> function of all of us is to collect
royalties for artists when their
>>>> music is
>>>>
>>>>> performed on the radio, film, TV,
internet, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> ASCAP is the oldest and strongest PRO
in the world. When you join ASCAP,
>>>> you
>>>>
>>>>> join for 1 year terms (meaning you can
resign each year if you want).
>>>> We're a
>>>>
>>>>> not for profit company and have the
lowest operating costs in the States
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>> amongst the lowest in the world. When
you join, you become a member and
>>>> have a
>>>>
>>>>> say in how we operate. It's free to
join and there are never any dues to
>>>> pay.
>>>>
>>>>> These points are NOT all true for
either BMI or SESAC.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know a lot of bands from Boston like
the idea of Creative Commons and
>>>> aren't
>>>>
>>>>> sure how PRO's play into it. Here's
what you should know, if you join
>>>> ASCAP,
>>>>
>>>>> it's a nonexclusive agreement. Which
means, you tell us if/when you want
>>>> us to
>>>>
>>>>> collect your $. So, if you choose to
give your music away for free, just
>>>> let us
>>>>
>>>>> know. It's your music and we want you
to do what you want with it. If
>>>>> you
>>>> want
>>>>
>>>>> us to collect your money, just let us
know and we will. So, you really
>>>> have the
>>>>
>>>>> option to choose on your own.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please be aware though, that if you
take the route of Creative Commons,
>>>> there's
>>>>
>>>>> no turning back. You have just given
away your music for free, forever.
>>>> You
>>>>
>>>>> can't later change your mind and decide
you want to make royalties.
>>>> Creative
>>>>
>>>>> Commons is really controversial and so
misunderstood by so many that
>>>>> it's
>>>> hard
>>>>
>>>>> to know exactly what you're getting
into. Lawrence Lessig is the man who
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>> pushing the concept and has written
books about the subject, but it's
>>>>> interesting that his books are
copyrighted, published and earn money
>>>>> just
>>>> like
>>>>
>>>>> songs do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, best of luck on whatever you
decide!
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> XXXXXXXXXX
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Benjamim Sisto
>>>>> 617 784 6115
>>>>> ben.sistogmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-communitylists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


iD8DBQFFi6TgkbN024ZV0z0RAqRaAJ9ZVcRXzvF3WK/tUqvUBElI/jTDuwCe
OE9P
qm50fb1VCGNrtLFwU8qK3/g=
=Dpjq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
cc-community mailing list
cc-communitylists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community

ASCAP VS CREATIVE COMMONS

Thread: ASCAP VS CREATIVE COMMONS