Home »Forum»Feedback and Suggestions»Wikiloops License

Wikiloops License

posted on #1
Supporter
Posts: 333
Joined: 27.02.15
Following on from this thread [url=http://www.wikiloops.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=1138]here[/url], is it worth putting a reminder on the download pop-up that the music cannot be used for commercial purposes without written consent? Perhaps even a check-box saying they've read the T&Cs? I know it won't stop all people but might catch a few more innocent users who perhaps haven't read or fully understood the license?

I'd also suggest the reminder doesn't need to appear for PUMs.

Thoughts?
Edited by mpointon on 19-09-2016 15:47
posted on #2
Supporter
Posts: 2080
Joined: 30.12.10
what are PUMs, please? PermanentlyUnlineMen?

Well, I see your point, and I had the same feeling. On the other hand, I know how everybody including me tends to skip lengthy smallprint reads on legal stuff, so ideally one might try to do a very much simplified display of what the license allows and what not.

Problem remains that in todays online world, people do get confused about where commercial use starts, so let me do a quick brainstorm on that, possibly to be moved to the help section or some more prominent place later on...
Personally, I would take a very conservative view on the "commercial use" question, which would be quite hard to actually enforce online.

What should be clear is that anything involving the use of tracks aquired via wikiloops and leading to receiving money has to be considered commercial use.
If you sell a CD or a download with wikiloops tracks, or your remixes of wikiloops tracks, these are commercial activities of the most obvious category. It doesn't matter if you actually sell anything, your attempt to do that is a commercial activity.

The second level of commercial use which I'd consider as such would not have to involve direct cash revenues for music - if you p.e. use wikiloops music in an advertising videoclip for a product you are selling, that would be commercial use as well.
If you would use a wikiloops track in an advertising for some charity cause or nonprofit thing, I would not consider that commercial use if you didn't get paid for creating the clip, and named all participants and wikiloops as required by the WL public license.

And last, we have the third level of commercial use, which I like to referr to as "the grey zone". This happens whenever wikiloops tracks are reuploaded to other web platforms, be it facebook, youtube, soundcloud or any other service you may think of.
You may upload tracks to these platforms for your private enjoyment, to "share with friends" or with whatever motivation.
If you chose to place ads along your shared content (as you can do on youtube videos), that would be a very obvious case of commercial use, but even if you do not do that,
the service provider of that platform is not a non profit livingroom extension, but a commercial enterprise.
You may not be enjoying any monetary benefits when sharing wikiloops music on some third party website, but they surely will, and -without realizing that- you will grant them the right to do that when uploading.
It's a huge mess that the web 2.0 area has created, and my hopes to sort that out are very little to tell you the truth.

Bottom line, as long as the requirements of the public license are met (including nameing the participating members and wikiloops) and your use doesn't fall into the obvious commercial activities mentioned in level 1 or 2, you are good to go.
Any other projects invovling wikiloops tracks do require prior written consent by all involved participants.



The idea to offer some kind of simple looking decision finder tool that lets you check wether your desired usecase is covered by our license might be a good idea.
That will be a bit complicated to set up, but if the user can narrow down his or hers use-idea step by step, that might be a cool tool to have.... I'll think about that a little.
"Sorry - had to do it!" - Les Claypool

yes, you are looking at the administrators signature.
posted on #3
Supporter
Posts: 500
Joined: 27.09.14
I checked his songs, they got Baer playing on one track as well - I am sure he would have told you if he'd been asked ;)

Yes, we got to do something. It would be nice to be aksed anyway, but if someone is selling your shizzle and not even telling you, that's naughty. Not the spirit of things we want to have here. So yes, it would be good to have a reminder somewhere.
Edited by Dick on 19-09-2016 17:29
posted on #4
Supporter
Posts: 333
Joined: 27.02.15
Sorry. PUM = Paid Up Member. I meant supporting member. Sorry.

You're absolutely right. I was thinking just a gentle sentence saying 'please remember to ask permission from performers if this track is to be used commercially or outside Wikiloops' or something to that effect. Not a lengthy read, just a gentle reminder. As you say, it's more about the spirit of the 'Loops.
Edited by mpointon on 19-09-2016 19:08
posted on #5
Supporter
Posts: 48
Joined: 18.01.16
Would it be possible to encode the tracks when we upload them here?
I mean to use the technology which allows "Shazam" to identify a track.
Or may be we could encode them ourselves using the same soft before an upload...
Funkystan
posted on #6
Member
Posts: 335
Joined: 25.03.12
Funkystan wrote:
Would it be possible to encode the tracks when we upload them here?
I mean to use the technology which allows "Shazam" to identify a track.
Or may be we could encode them ourselves using the same soft before an upload...


I believe what you are referring to is called a "watermark" (and no, shazam uses a different technology). But is has been suggested by various companies (Fraunhofer etc) to make ip infringement more difficult. But to my knowing no one has implemented it. And there are probably good reasons for that. And i do believe that no here would turn to that path.

Making people understand the rules is often enough to make them comply to them.
Pure fingerstyle
posted on #7
Supporter
Posts: 48
Joined: 18.01.16
Hi Nilton,
Yep, I was not talking about the technology or the algorithms used by Shazam... But exactly what you named: A watermark...
And I guess you're right, they can't, so, we won't stop infrigement...
Martin's concern was about people who might use our music in a commercial purpose without asking.
Anyway, in case of a conflict about who originally owns the rights or who created the music, our uploads here are dated... I guess it would be a reasonable proof.

What afraids me too is if someone downloads one of my tracks here and use it for purposes of trade (or not), I probably wouldn't be aware of it.

But what afraids me the most would be is if someone uses a track I'm part of to share ideas I desagree with... Imagine that a guy registers to wiki uploads your track and decide to put your track on his blog called "Promote racism"... This wouldn't be a commercial use.
And the worst of the worst would be that he could promote the track... "Drums by martin, guitars by Nilton and T-G, vocals by funkystan... I love them, so cool...And Courtesy of Wikiloops..." Etc...

Sorry... I've uploaded a song here called insomnia... I'm gonna write a new one called paranoia.... ;(
Edited by Funkystan on 21-09-2016 20:54
Funkystan
wikiloops online jamsessions are brought to you with friendly support by:
FrankMil from Australia

"the best thing to happen for musicians since electricity was invented"

wikiloops.com uses Cookies to provide you the best possible browsing experience.
Read more in our data privacy policy.