Re: [microsound] open source

[Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 2003-11-02 at 11:43, Kim Cascone wrote:

> 
> if there is to be some discussion around this topic then can we also include
> content as open source? e.g., the samples that are freely available for
> project work (pending permission of the artist) on the hotline server or the
> Droplift project?

here are some starting points:

http://www.free-music.org/ - general info on free music
http://www.irixx.org/copyleft/ - various copleft/open content resources
http://omrl.sourceforge.net/ - a project startup for sharing
loops/samples in a free (stellman kind) manner.

> how do these microsound projects hinge on the concept of open source?

it's all about the license.  The microsound projects don't have a
license associated (that I know of, someone correct me if I'm wrong).  I
don't think they're public domain, either.

> also, is it necessary to use only open source tools to make open source
> content?

Not at all.  However, if you want to embrace the philosophy you will
probably find proprietary tools less interesting.

> where are the boundaries of the praxis of being 'open source'?

there are no boundaries.  It's complete freedom.

> how does open source work as a parallel economic system to consumer
> capitalism?

The most important fact is that open source gives complete freedom to
the end-user.  Freedom to use, distribute, sell, share, modify, redo,
build upon without any restrictions and need for royalties or other
responsibilities.

> how does using 'open source' tools create a political effect that is
> different than using [k] software?

using [k]ed SW is illegal.  It's not much of a political statement.  If
you get caught, you could suffer legal consequences.  And it is not even
an effective way of subverting commercial software distribution. You
crack, the SW developer improves his protection scheme,  ups the price
tag, the whole user community suffers.  Not to mention that the copy
protection scheme may cause you other headaches (periodic registration,
incompatibilities with other tools, frequent crashes).

> if many people contribute labor and intellectual property to a open source
> tool then is it any different than the present system when a few people
> profit from this open source tool by selling content created with it?

But everybody profits from the tool.  And everybody has the right to use
the tool and sell content created with the tool.

Open source software does not oblige you to create open content.
But you may wish to do so.

-- 
	      _
      __  __ (_)___   Michal Seta
     / 	\/  \ _/^ _|
    /  	     V |_  \ @creazone.32k.org
   (___/V\___|_|___/
http://www.[creazone]|[noonereceiving].32k.org

------------------------------