![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
im a muso of some sort so ill try and have a play and see if i can get anything going
![Razz :p](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
Moderator: OpenTTD Developers
I actually agree to this. GPL is mostly about coding. A very nice GPL like license for music would be the free art license. But i think the cc sampling + will work fine. I don't think anyone involved with the project (me, lucas and peterts brother so far) are going to object to it. I think within a week (maybe 2 since it's still holidays) we should have decided and finalised what license we are going to use.kamnet wrote: for anything related to music a CC license appears to be the preferred route, while GPL is preferred for actual computer software.
I have updated the wiki to try and reflect the current state of the project. If what is written there is wrong, or not true, by all means edit it, but I believe that is what we have sort of decided so far.-lucas- wrote:
I think we should keep the pre-existing tracks seperated from the tracks at least three people (petert('s brother), jvlomax and myself) are going to compose now. So i suggest we make a wiki or topic about the sound alike project, complete with (nick)names, tracks in progress, tracks finished and tracks that still need a ´translation´.
I won't have any thing of substance for another week or two when the holidays are over-lucas- wrote:
As far as i understand, jvlomax wants to start with Jammit, i would like to sink my teeth into the intro music, so if petert('s brother) also picks one, that would be three good testcases.
That's what has been suggested, but in my opinion you could just say "Track 15" instead of a specific song and just do what ever you want, then that song will be track 15. For now though i think that we should just create one track each, and work from there, re-interpreted tracks or not.petert wrote:I see you've put me and my brother as "Unknown" and you and lucas with a song title. Are we supposed to be re-creating a specific theme/type of song?
That's what i was thinking too. The free art license is a very close comparison to the GPL for music (or art in general). Then again, we could do like mozilla and make an "Ottd public license"Ammler wrote: P.S.: The main difference between CC and GPL is the need of opensource. What is the source of a midi file?
We are currently working on a song called "Train Madness", and I (and hopefully Tom) would like to keep the title instead of "Track XX".jvlomax wrote:That's what has been suggested, but in my opinion you could just say "Track 15" instead of a specific song and just do what ever you want, then that song will be track 15. For now though i think that we should just create one track each, and work from there, re-interpreted tracks or not.
Any idea how silly it is to make a new license? Any idea how much work it is to write a proper license? Any idea how much work you give the packagers as they need to review that license and determine whether it's free enough for them? Any idea how many people will not have a clue what such a license entails, whereas lots of people know what e.g. GPL or the CC licenses are? Any idea how the different 'local' laws influence your license?jvlomax wrote:make an "Ottd public license"
I don't understand, is there something in the EULA for Debian that prevents its users from downloading and installing content with a Creative Commons license?Ammler wrote:OpenSFX should be a example, why not using CC license for new work, as your goal is to make a "open" clone of TTD, you should also give openttd the possibility to distribute the music with it. If you license it with CC, this isn't possible for Debian users for example.
It's not possible to actually duplicate specific tracks from the TTD game, since we don't have a license to sample them, so be careful with thatpetert wrote:We are currently working on a song called "Train Madness", and I (and hopefully Tom) would like to keep the title instead of "Track XX".jvlomax wrote:That's what has been suggested, but in my opinion you could just say "Track 15" instead of a specific song and just do what ever you want, then that song will be track 15. For now though i think that we should just create one track each, and work from there, re-interpreted tracks or not.
[/quote]Edit: Have we decided on a short name for the Music Replacement Project? Will it be OpenMSX?
OpenSFX is currently licensed under the Creative Commons Sampling+ 1.0 license, which is why I suggested it for this project as well. So, is this to say that because of that license, OpenSFX will not be pre-installed w/ Debian distributions?Rubidium wrote:Anyhow, my suggestions are to find a license that allows the set to be distributed via BaNaNaS, OpenTTD's packages, OpenTTD's installers and the different Linux repositories (including 'non-free' repositories). If this wouldn't be allowed, the set would basically be meaningless.
It would be an added bonus if it were distributable in the main repositories, see the main section in the http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ page for 'free' enough licenses. This basically means that there may be no "non-commercial" clause in the license.
Why wait? Just use the GPL. It's really the easiest thing to dojvlomax wrote: I think within a week (maybe 2 since it's still holidays) we should have decided and finalised what license we are going to use
Ach no, that's not a flame or rudejvlomax wrote:I don't want to flame you or be rude, but read the posts.
From my understanding (IANAL), it would be acceptable to CCSP+ files with a Debian distro, even one that is paid for, since the purpose of distributing the files with Debian is not done with the intent of actually selling the files covered uncer CCSP+.Noncommercial sharing of verbatim copies permitted.
1. You may reproduce the Work, incorporate the Work into one or more Collective Works, and reproduce the Work as incorporated in the Collective Works. You may distribute copies or phonorecords of, display publicly, perform publicly, and perform publicly by means of a digital audio transmission the Work including or incorporated in Collective Works.
2. You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in the paragraph immediately above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. The exchange of the Work for other copyrighted works by means of digital file-sharing or otherwise shall not be considered to be intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation, provided there is no payment of any monetary compensation in connection with the exchange of copyrighted works.
Code: Select all
[url=http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=46479][img]http://www.tt-forums.net/download/file.php?id=121962[/img][/url]
I disagree here. MIDI files only contain the sheet music, there is no performing artist involved, only the composer has any rights to the file.kamnet wrote:Here is the main problem that I see with GPL v.2: it does not address the performance of musical works. MIDI files are musical scores, which are not only covered by copyright but also by other laws which compensate the owner for performance of the work.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests