Free Music License?
simo.sorce at xsec.it
Thu Aug 18 14:42:20 UTC 2005
On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 16:11 +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:16:51AM +0200, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 13:03 +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > > I agree, but there are limit where the compromise in the other
> > > direction actually helps the freedom in the society.
> > The perfect compromise would be to say: "As long as you preserve the
> > meaning you can modify the work to fit technical needs".
> I expect a different compromise for each category of works
> to be a good solution.
> > Are you sure? It's true that compensation give someone a chance to
> > dedicate more time to a matter, but are you sure there's a direct link
> > between compensation and quality?
> I am sure there is a connection, though it is not a simple relation.
> Note that I have deliberately not wrote "paied" or "money"
> as I wanted a more neutral tone.
Ok I assumed you were speaking of economic compensation == money, if you
give a broader meaning to compensation I mostly agree with you.
> > I'd say no, the link is between motivation and skills, and quality.
> > Now granted you have the right skills, in some cases compensation can be
> > the right motivator. But compensation is not enough in most of the
> > cases, and does not matte at all in many cases.
> Your "motivation" seems to be similiar to what I called "compensation".
Yes, I used motivation because some times people do things (even great
ones) without expecting any compensation (think of anonymous works in
the Public Domain).
> In admitting that money can be the right motivatior in a fraction of cases,
> you admitted a connection.
> Also I am not ready to completely throw away the benefits of
> competition and a market. It has its limits, but also its advantages.
How can you throw away a market? The only way is through complete
> A lot of the high quality "content" that I make use of is done by
> professionals which are in a competitive market.
> An example are the newspaper I read.
Oh the more I read newspapers the more I'd say the opposite about their
quality :-), but I agree on the concept underlying this example.
> > > To make realistic suggestions for the politicians,
> > > we need to accept that many people accept the idea of economic reward.
> > I do not see the link, under this line of reasoning you just advocate
> > the status quo as that is accepted by most people ...
> No, I recommend that our recipe should include an answer for those people
> that have accepted the idea of the economic stimulation.
> Anything we propose will not be heard until we have a good answer to them.
Ok I agree on this, it's just that I do not see why we should ban the
idea of economic stimulation, it's just about balancing it with other
Simo Sorce - simo.sorce at xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it
via Garofalo, 39 - 20133 - Milano
mobile: +39 329 328 7702
tel. +39 02 2953 4143 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
More information about the Discussion