<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BeatPick.com &#8211; Is there life after copyright?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/</link>
	<description>the Open Business Project</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:42:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mjd</title>
		<link>http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/comment-page-1/#comment-833</link>
		<dc:creator>mjd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 May 2006 01:02:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/#comment-833</guid>
		<description>One _really_ obvious question.  In what way can this be said to be &quot;open&quot;?

You say you&#039;re using the by-nc-sa license, but how do I &quot;share-alike&quot; when the only way of listening to the music is by streaming via a Flash player? I can&#039;t make a local copy of it for myself, never mind sharing.

You say that non-commercial projects can re-use the music.  How?  By asking permission.  The whole point of the Creative Commons project is to let people know what freedoms they have, so that they don&#039;t have to ask permission.

As far as the practical freedoms granted to users is concerned, I see no difference between how this business operates and any other online music store. If you have no intention of putting your users in a position where they can exercise the freedoms granted by the CC by-nc-sa license, you shouldn&#039;t be using it.

By slapping a Creative Commons logo on your site, you are being deliberately misleading, and distracting people from genuine free/open music services that they should be supporting, like Jamendo.

Matthew.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One _really_ obvious question.  In what way can this be said to be &#8220;open&#8221;?</p>
<p>You say you&#8217;re using the by-nc-sa license, but how do I &#8220;share-alike&#8221; when the only way of listening to the music is by streaming via a Flash player? I can&#8217;t make a local copy of it for myself, never mind sharing.</p>
<p>You say that non-commercial projects can re-use the music.  How?  By asking permission.  The whole point of the Creative Commons project is to let people know what freedoms they have, so that they don&#8217;t have to ask permission.</p>
<p>As far as the practical freedoms granted to users is concerned, I see no difference between how this business operates and any other online music store. If you have no intention of putting your users in a position where they can exercise the freedoms granted by the CC by-nc-sa license, you shouldn&#8217;t be using it.</p>
<p>By slapping a Creative Commons logo on your site, you are being deliberately misleading, and distracting people from genuine free/open music services that they should be supporting, like Jamendo.</p>
<p>Matthew.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BeatPick.com</title>
		<link>http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/comment-page-1/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>BeatPick.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2006 15:25:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/#comment-109</guid>
		<description>Hi there, thanks for the question. We&#039;re betting that on the one hand it is possible to grant people a certain degree of freedom in order to promote art, harness network externalities (word of mouth), give artists the possibility to collaborate with filmmakers on no-profit projects and all under the umbrella of the creative commons which protect some of their ownership rights but on the other hand to earn money with people that wish to enjoy a superior service and are willing to pay for it. 

The idea is that there are many people that are happy with free streaming, with a free shared copy and with using our music for no-profit but there are also many other people who wish to get the WAV files for the music, who wish to get an original copy with artwork as well as to use the music for commercial projects and are willing to pay for this privilege. To some extent this is like offering a software for free and then selling the gold or platinum version. We guarantee a basic service for all people as we are interested in promoting art and getting our music out there but then we charge a fee for superior service. 

I hope this gives a better idea regarding what we&#039;re trying to do. Any other question are more then welcome. 

David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there, thanks for the question. We&#8217;re betting that on the one hand it is possible to grant people a certain degree of freedom in order to promote art, harness network externalities (word of mouth), give artists the possibility to collaborate with filmmakers on no-profit projects and all under the umbrella of the creative commons which protect some of their ownership rights but on the other hand to earn money with people that wish to enjoy a superior service and are willing to pay for it. </p>
<p>The idea is that there are many people that are happy with free streaming, with a free shared copy and with using our music for no-profit but there are also many other people who wish to get the WAV files for the music, who wish to get an original copy with artwork as well as to use the music for commercial projects and are willing to pay for this privilege. To some extent this is like offering a software for free and then selling the gold or platinum version. We guarantee a basic service for all people as we are interested in promoting art and getting our music out there but then we charge a fee for superior service. </p>
<p>I hope this gives a better idea regarding what we&#8217;re trying to do. Any other question are more then welcome. </p>
<p>David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Administrator</title>
		<link>http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/comment-page-1/#comment-107</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/04/26/beatpickcom-is-there-life-after-copyright/#comment-107</guid>
		<description>One obvious question here is if BeatPick is a for profit, or non profit project. It seems Open in many regards, but how can it be sustained. What will sustain it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One obvious question here is if BeatPick is a for profit, or non profit project. It seems Open in many regards, but how can it be sustained. What will sustain it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

