[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GNU FDL 1.2 draft comment summary posted, and RFD


On Thursday 13 June 2002 22:58, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
> > Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> wrote:
> > > 2) We don't want a music webcaster to take DFCL-licensed
> > > piece of music out of "the commons" because he runs the
> > > music stream through some sort of highly proprietary
> > > equalization/compression process before transmitting it. 
> > > Such a transformation might not be reversible.  If this is
> > > the most popular form of dissemination for that piece of
> > > music, we have to be sure that this broadcaster is
> > > obligated to make the original piece of music, as licensed
> > > under the DFCL, available.

1. I think that the piece of music in question will most likely
   not be presented in its preferred form for modification but
   as something rendered by a sample mixer or
   sequencer-based synthesizer program. 

   So, if the license requires a webcaster to provide the source
   code to his audience, he will have to do it anyway, with or
   without compression.

   The only exception I can think of are "AAD" recordings.
   (These recordings are recorded and mixed in an analog
   environment, and then digitized as the final step) Only in
   their case I would call the presentable form "source code".

2. I do not agree that lossy compression changes the
   source-binary-status of a file. Compressing a binary will
   result in a binary, and compressing a source WAV will create 
   a derivative work's source OGG.

> >
> > Are you thinking of MP3's here?
> I was thinking of .oggs, actually.  ;-)
> Actually, except for tag editing, neither .ogg nor .mp3 is the
> preferred format for making changes to an audio work. 

You can turn the OGG file into a WAV file without any problem, 
and as you state below, WAV files are suitable to be modified. 
The only problem in this is that you end up having a file that 
is several times larger.

> I don't
> even want to think about the artifacts that would result if
> you attempted this.
> The preferred form for making changes to an audio stream would
> instead be, for instance, WAVE or FLAC.

There are some musicians who work with Mini Discs. 


PS: Branden, the other mail you received was accidentally 
addressed to you because I was in a hurry. Please don't plonk me 
for it.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: