Tag Archives: remix

The CC License

Week 10:
Following week 10 tutorial’s exercise, explain why you chose the Creative Commons license that you added to your blog and discuss the relevance (or not) of adding the license.

See the little rectangle on the right of my blog with small circles and random drawings? That’s my Creative Commons (CC) License.

The CC License came about when people felt that the Copyright license was too much of a hassle to go through, and people did not know when certain works could be used, in one way of another. An example would be wanting to use a song for a school project, but you’re not sure if you can, because the song is copyrighted.

That’s when the CC License comes into place. It allows users to know what they can, or cannot do with each article of work. The CC Licenses allows authors to share their works, yet retain certain rights (Medosch 2008). It makes things easier now, doesn’t it? This CC License saves people time of having doing checks! You’re also able access creative works without being sued for copyright (Garcelon 2009)!

One of the main issues to using the CC license is that others may edit your work, improve on it, and sell it commercially (Garcelon 2009). Would you be ok with that?

I’m honestly not comfortable with the idea of letting someone use my work for commercial purposes, but I’m fine with them editing my work. Thus the reason for my CC License.

My rationale: if someone can improve on my work, why not? We’re trying to make the world a better place to be in, for it to be connected. This is my way of helping, allowing someone to use it my work and improve on it. We’ll all benefit in that way, especially in the areas of research.

For me to have come up with certain works, I would have leeched ideas from many places, then put them together. Take the idea of Reese’s peanut butter cups.  They were formed by peanut butter and chocolate. I’d be humbled if someone took my idea and proposed a better one, and thanked me for being his/her inspiration.

Connectivity has helped make the world a better place. There is even a World Creativity and Innovation Week where people come together to celebrate the new ideas that have been shared. During the week, people are also encouraged to put together 2 or more ideas, and come up with something even better.

What I’m not ok with, is when someone uses my works, makes it better, then sells it for commercial purposes. Worst still, if they did not credit me in any way. Should I not get a part of your profits since I was the one who came up with the work? All you had to do was to edit it, and make it better. Editing is much easier compared to coming up with something entirely different. While I value interactivity and connectivity, I do not wish to encourage plagarism, what’s more, for a profit.

Here are the descriptions of the varying licenses. Alternatively, you can click here to have a look.

Creative Commons License
1) attribution CC BY
+ You can make copies, remix and distribute the owner’s, be it for research or commercial purposes.
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified.

Creative Commons License
2) Attribution-ShareAlike CC BY-SA
+ You can make copies, remix and distribute the owner’s, be it for research or commercial purposes.
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified. When you come up with your own “remix”, or adaptation, the owner should be credited too. You may only distribute your work under the same, or similar license.

Creative Commons License
3) Attribution-NoDerivs CC BY-ND
+ You can make copies and distribute the owner’s work, be it for research or commercial purposes.
– Do not alter or edit the work in any way.
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified. When you come up with your own “remix”, or adaptation, the owner should be credited too. You may only distribute your work under the same, or similar license.

Creative Commons License
4) Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC
+ You can make copies, remix and distribute the owner’s work.
– Do not use this work for commercial purposes
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified.

Creative Commons License
5) Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike CC BY-NC-SA
+ You  can make copies, remix and distribute the owner’s work.
– Do not use this work for commercial purposes
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified. When you come up with your own “remix”, or adaptation, the owner should be credited too. You may only distribute your work under the same, or similar license.

Creative Commons License
6) Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-ND
+ You  can make copies and distribute the owner’s work
– Do not use this work for commercial purposes
– Do not make it seem as if the owner is endorsing your work.
– Do not alter or edit the work in any way.
Keep in mind: Attribute work in the way that owner has specified.

ANY conditions can be waived, as long as you get permission from the owner personally.

So as you can see, number 1 is the most flexible license. It’s as if you’ve stuck gold if you chance upon a piece of work with this license. On the other hand, number 6 is the most restrictive. You can’t make any changes to the work; the work is not to be used for commercial purposes… and depending on how you feel about people using your work, editing it, be it for commercial or other purposes, it’ll affect the license you choose.

References

Creative Commons 2011, Creative Commons, California, viewed 20 may 2011 from  <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/&gt;.

Garcelon, M 2009, ‘An Information Commons? Creative Commons and Public Access to Cultural Creations’, New Media & Society, pp. 1307-1326.

Medosch, A, 2008 ‘Paid in Full: Copyright, Piracy and the Real Currency of Cultural Production’, in Deptforth. TV Diaries II: Pirate Strategies, London, pp. 73-97.

Advertisements

Rulture Cremix

UHHH WHATTT DID I JUST DO THERE.

Oh year! Remix culture! Tried my hand at remixing words, obviously now I know it’s not my forte, and I should concentrate on doing other things..

Music has been revolutionized in a couple of ways, from the sharing of music files online (Russell, Ito, Richmond & Tuters 2008), people creating mix tapes, or even putting two songs together to form a “new” song, otherwise known as remixing.

How does this remix culture affect the music industry then? People still listen to songs, people are able to earn money from remixes, music is still being made.. BUT.. this is what we didn’t know! The music industry’s revenue has gone from US $14.32 billion, to US $9.65 in a span of 7 years (2000 – 2006) (Russell 2008).

That’s more than a 50% drop…. Yikes. Not sure how it happened, but for the next trivia, I can come up with a few reasons..

The sale of CDs has declined from 942million to 614 million, also from 2000 – 2006 (Russell 2008).  Reasons.. hmm

1) YouTube. Why buy CDs when you can search for the song on YouTube? You can listen to it all day long..

2) listentoyoutube.com. Wanna listen to your fav song on the go? This website allows one to download just the audio bits from YouTube.

3) Torrents. Think that YouTube’s quality isn’t that good? Torrents allow one to download songs in the original high-quality form..

4) file sending over msn, email. If you plop your CD into your computer, you can ‘drag’ the songs out onto your desktop, and play it with and music player (VLC, iTunes, Windows Media Player). That same way, you can send the song file to your friend, or upload it on YouTube (see the vicious cycle now?)

What about remixing songs? Did that kill the music industry? Or did it help make the industry better?

I’d love to hear your thoughts…

I feel that remixing has actually made the music industry better. I don’t have any statistics with regards to an increase of band popularity or sales due to remixes, so my opinions are on a personal level. I know damn well that without remixing, I wouldn’t have heard the name of many songs, and bands, and I would have never become a fan!

Take the band, Norwegian Recycling. I first heard their song How Six Songs Collide, when a friend sent it to me.  And from there, I went on to search the titles of the 6 songs, and subsequently went on to search for the singers and bands… I’ve yet to buy their album as I’ve never seen it in stores, but I sure would.

One friend, Joshua Simon, has been doing remixes. By himself! Yea, it’s really cool. He did the beats, even made videos… he has a great voice, and his remixes don’t cover just new songs but even older songs.. and I feel, hey if you mix both together, “old” songs won’t be forgotten!

Here are a few of my favourites.. (=

<iframe width=”640″ height=”390″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/f55eT5lU9Ao&#8221; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

Remixes provide a fresh approach to old songs, new twist, sometimes a new melody… and the singer really does affect the portrayal of songs… well, that’s my opinion. Not convinced that remixes are better? Let me hear your thoughts!

References

Russell A., Ito M., Richmond T., & Tuters, M. 2008, ‘Culture: Media Convergence and Networked Culture’, in Kazys Vernelis (ed.) Networked Publics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.43-76.