Free Music License?
Alfred M. Szmidt
ams at gnu.org
Mon Aug 15 10:53:40 UTC 2005
> For music, I'd say ithat a simple `verbatim copying' license
> would be enough.
Verbatim only? That fails to grant freedom to modify and
redistribute. Do you think such a license should be called "free"?
Because music is not a functional work, and you don't need the right
to `modify' it, you can have it, but it is not a nessecary right.
Where as with software, it is.
And labeling everything with `free', when one speaks of the freedoms
that govern free software, will only cloud the discussion, so please
don't say `free' when you really mean `free software'.
The is the same problem that Debian faces, labeling everything as
`free software', and then excluding everything that doesn't fall into
that category (like free doucmnetation, free music, etc).
Why should music users get less freedom over a work than users of
Music and software are different, comparing the blindly will only lead
More information about the Discussion