Re: OT: for our planned festival - distribution channels regarding "call for performers", legal advice regarding ancillary copyright

[Dennis Moser <sinsofmachaut@gmail.com>]

Rainer,

That isn't quite right ... the BY-NC-ND does allow the re-distribution ... but permission must STILL be granted for use beyond the license and copyright is STILL retained. That's the whole point of that type of license ... the 3rd part MUST have permission to use the material beyond simply being able to share it. And that sharing MUST be linked back to you, or they have violated the license and would be subject to recourse.

We could still use a CC license for the performance of work not previously covered by a contract (unless you have an agreement with a rights organization to whom you have signed over the COPYRIGHT of all your performances past and future, which even in this day and age people are still signing!).

No, I'm not a lawyer, but I dohave to deal with this in my day job ...

Dennis

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Rainer Straschill <moinsound@googlemail.com> wrote:

Jeff said:
> Couldn't we have some kind of Creative Commons license? Like Ninjam perfomances.

The short answer is "no".

The slightly longer one: even the most restrictive cc license
(by-nc-nd) will allow third parties to freely distribute the work in
question. This may be a problem in some cases with people bound to a
performing rights organization by which they pass the handling of
rights to that organization exclusively and for the duration of the
contract, but internet streams may be exempt from that regulation
(some of the German GEMA contracts are of that kind).
In such a case, an artist would very well be able to grant us the
right to stream his material via the internet, but would not allow him
to publish it under a cc license.

           Rainer

-- 
http://myspace.com/usrsbin
http://audiozoloft.com
http://usrslashsbin.angrek.com/