en/computer/legal/freedom IIWEBlog -- Wouter's Eclectic Bloghttps://grep.be/blog//en/computer/legal/freedom_II/WEBlog -- Wouter's Eclectic Blogikiwiki2014-03-01T13:42:06ZSing it, brother!https://grep.be/blog//en/computer/legal/freedom_II/comment_1886/Kristofer Bergstrom (kris@OnEnsemble.org)2014-03-01T13:42:06Z2011-07-10T15:25:23Z
<p>I too am a musician and free software user and whole-heartedly agree that music should enjoy the four freedoms. The requirement to change a work's title and to provide attribution solves Brockmeier's greatest fears. His simplistic view that works of art come from and represent a single creator reveals his limited understanding of the art world. </p>
<p>A final note... As a professional musician, I don't have any use for NC-licensed works and am dismayed by the almost ubiquitous use of this clause by musicians. Why would I start playing around with a melody or sample when I know I can't perform and can't record the successes come from exploration? NC-licenses force others to be consumers rather than creators, and lock out the professional musicians you'd most want to take advantage and build upon the works.</p>
Forwarding a comment from bronson on LWNhttps://grep.be/blog//en/computer/legal/freedom_II/comment_1887/bronson2014-03-01T13:42:06Z2011-07-11T17:25:15Z
<p>http://lwn.net/Articles/451016/</p>
<p>That was awesome! Lucid and funny, quite unlike the wandering freakout that it was replying to.</p>
Excellent rebuttal rebuttalhttps://grep.be/blog//en/computer/legal/freedom_II/comment_1896/clacke (https://identi.ca/clacke)2014-03-01T13:42:06Z2011-07-19T06:33:42Z
A standing ovation to you for this piece, Sir. Sums up my sentiments exactly, but better than I could ever write them.