flynn23 wrote:
] Not really. CC license would allow you to commercialize the
] content as long as you gave proper citation. While I think
] it's a great idea to give to people the ability to 'play' with
] the material (it's a great educational tool), the idea that
] artists (particularly *this* artist) is restricting your
] ability to manipulate it for commercial purposes, smacks of
] the highest order of hypocracy.

Most of the CC licenses include a Non-Commercial use clause as well. Its one of the most common options on the CC licenses.

I think what NIN and Interscope is doing here is quite fair. They are reserving commercial usage of the track for themselves. Non-commercial usage is just fine with them. If you are making money, they are going to want a piece. Its their asset; they invested the money to have it created. You are using it.

What really matters, is if you do have a commercial usage for the material they have released, how are they going to handle it? Repackaging in different forms is also an issue. Are they just going to flat out say 'no'? Or are they going to have unreasonable terms? These are very valid questions.. However, if someone wants to reserve their right to profit from their works, that should be regarded as ok. Anything else is a form of extremism. Nothing about this closes the door to using it commercially, you just have to contact them. As it all stands right now, this is still an increase of the freedoms granted to the end user. No matter which way I look at it, its a step in the right direction.

Yes, it would have been nice if they used a CC license for this, so that the terms were formalized based upon a widely agreed framework. At this point, I'm just glad to see them experimenting with these types of usages and releases. The single is undergoing innovation.

It would also be nice if you could still sample anything you wanted to, and as much as you wanted to, a la the golden age you mentioned. Doing another Paul's Boutique style album would be a nightmare now due to having to clear all the samples. And yes, it has effected expression because people either can't or their labels will not go through that process. The only way this situation is going to improve is better clearing houses for clearing sample rights, and explicit licensing. The golden age is over. We are starting into something else right now. The asset holders are going to be on the conservative side.

From the perspective of culture, and not straight IP, this is an extremely good thing. The artist is inviting the listener into the process. That's something which has been mostly lost, not due to IP issues, but due to the changing styles of music and the technology used to create it. If we were still in the 60's, and a new Neil Young album came out, we would not have a problem sitting around with our guitars and harmonicas jamming on Heart of Gold. We'd have the tools that produced the sounds. That's not the easiest thing to do with a release from an artist like NIN. Given releases like this, that changes, again. Changes back actually..

We need to keep our eyeballs on the culture before the law. The law will be bent to fit the culture and the market that exists to support it. It _is_ just a matter of time, people coming up with the uses, and the need to exploit them. You would still have had an issue if you wanted to record and release the version of Heart of Gold your friends came up with. That has not changed. (Unless of course it was a parody, thanks to 2 Live Crew.)

RE: Boing Boing: NIN's Trent Reznor releases song as GarageBand file