Re: [microsound] Fwd: Creative Commons (Was RE: Podcast feedback?)

[devslashnull <dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think CC have an "attribution-share alike" license, which covers the 
scenario you describe below.

Commmercial use allowed as long as "If you alter, transform, or build 
upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a 
license identical to this one."

Seems pretty straightforward to me, but perhaps I am missing something.

On Apr 21, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:

> To me personally the way out is to explicitly allow commercial use of
> my music, *but* use a Copyleft catch, which is the ShareAlike in CC or
> the viral aspect of the GNU Pulic License for software: Every
> derivative work has to be licensed under the same terms and has to
> allow free distribution and commercial use by others. That is, if
> Microsoft would use my music in a TV ad, they would be allowed to do
> so, but only if everyone then would be allowed to use the Microsoft TV
> ad in the same way and built further works on it.
> I have no idea if this could really work for artworks, but so far, CC
> didn't even really try it. Plus: now CC themselves might even have
> become an obstacle for people, who would like to try it.
>
CommTom
Communications of Tomorrow
"it's only a day away"

unique electronic music for the adventurous ear.

http://www.commtom.com