Agreements Virtual Music Projects

[forestandgarden]

Look, I just wrote (and deleted) a 'rebellious' post here, because the word 'binding' in the first sentence jumped right into my eye, and it is only seven points down where the option of individual agreements is getting mentioned.

Why do I write that? Because I have been researching a little into what has happened on these forums before this new section got created, and I really, really believe that one main reason why the projects never took off, was: Too many conditions before the first note getting played. Born dead.

After looking at the rules above more in detail, I can say maybe I would make them different, but they make some sense and are in fact good. The first impression is not good.

And we are all sensitive, creative artist souls here. Or Rock&Roll warriors with an allergic reaction to bosses. So maybe we can do ourselves a favor by replacing 'binding' with 'default' or adding 'if not otherwise agreed', or even something funny and welcoming that makes it clear from the beginning that there's choice, it shouldn't remind people of the trauma they acquired when their first real band broke apart the moment their first manager wanted them to sign their first contract.

I found a good, clear starting point and reference for understanding copyright licenses at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ (no surprise)
Technically, I would even say (correct me if I'm wrong) that it should be ok if there is no agreement at all, because nobody could publish the parts he hasn't created without searching agreement first, no agreement means it didn't happen and everybody is still protected. I could live with it if somebody pulls out and takes the rights to all his parts with him; if that makes the project crash, it wasn't very strong and I should better learn how to keep participants* happy.

*errrh, yes, and if this agreement should be taken serious, then maybe 'participant' is a better word, because in English, the joiner is the guy with the nails and the hammer, aka carpenter

[forestandgarden]

I am not disappointed, and less so knowing that you're even on holiday still, which explains some projects waiting. But I have given quite a bit of my own energy to help this section come alive, offered music, joined projects, and pointed other people here, so I just have my own ideas of what makes collaboration attractive.
The confusion with 'Virtual', btw, is not a biggie, everybody who reads the section subtitle will understand the context.

About the captain thing, I am undecided. I have seen projects fail for not enough and for too much steering. I am more on the equality side, but if I get treated as 'primus inter parem', it silently pleases me.

[Lyberta]

This whole thing is solved by proper licenses. Person who starts a project defines a set of licenses that they will accept. Anyone who would like to contribute must provide a valid license for their contribution. Bam! Solved. For the default license I suggest "CC-BY-SA 4.0 or any later version".

[Lyberta]

You mean real paper licenses?
If that's what you meanth, i think that 'joining is giving licence by agreement' is much simpler.

We're not talking about copyrights or fees but only about using that what's brought into a project (even after someone pulls back).
So short: what's brought in, is rightfull in to use, and stay's in.
The piece of work stay's from the maker.

This is exactly what's copyright is used for. Under US law a music sheets, project files and recordings are copyrighted by default. The person who have created them or the employer in case of the work for hire automatically gets exclusive rights to the work. People who don't have exclusive rights can only do stuff that is covered under fair use. In order to do anything else you need to obtain a license from the holder of exclusive rights (or their licensor who have the right to sublicense) which is a legal document that specifies what you can and can't do. Violating this is a copyright infringement which may lead to a huge fine and even prison sentence.

For example, suppose you start a song and I compose and record a guitar solo for it. This makes me a holder of exclusive rights for that solo. However, suppose that I forget to state the license for that solo. This means that you don't have any rights over it beyond fair use. You understand that and contact me saying that I forgot to include the license. I apologize and say and write somewhere obvious that my solo is licensed under the terms of, say, CC-BY-SA 4.0. This is a legal document that was written by lawyers to have unambiguous meaning in court. Important parts of it that you now have the right to share my solo anywhere you want and can include it in your song. The catch is that if you do that, your song will need to have the same license and give the same freedoms to your listeners or remixers. This is called copyleft. You may want to not release your song under a copyleft license and may request a different license such as CC-BY 4.0 and then we would need to have a chat again about it.

I know it all sounds complicated at first but you need to know this. If you use proprietary software you may want to start reading EULAs that appear when you install it. Believe me, you are in for a surprise.

I haven't covered the recording rights which are created when you record a performance of a music that is in public domain such as classical music because I haven't had much experience with them. All in all, cooperation of people requires tough length of legal texts because there are a lot of people who are ungrateful bastards.

[Lyberta]

Btw, you forget that there are more ways to prove ownership otherwise than the us registration.
I've officially registered none if my work, but know that i can prove my rightfull creative ownership and will sew ($$$) if commercially hijacked.

There is no need for registration.

And copyleft licenses allow commercial use. Freedom 1 is freedom to make copies and distribute them. Licenses that do not allow commercial use are proprietary. For example, LinuxSampler.

I would certainly never contribute to anything that prohibits commercial use.

[Lyberta]

it's just a shame that you've put proprietary terms as default. Same thing with CC adding licenses with NC and ND.