Forums

    20 posts

  • avatar
    1 sound
    12 posts
    public domain sounds here!


    Hi, freesound.org is a great ressource for sound samples, but it only supports this one license up to now.
    With this license for example free GPL games can NOT use these sounds.( thats currently my problem ).
    But I think a lot of sound creators/recorders are willing to give their sounds for these kind of projects and others too.

    I think the most free license form is public domain.
    We should really start a list where authors can add themselves saying:
    "Yes, my sounds are public domain!"

    By this a very simple form of public domain publishing should be possible on freesounds.org

    So please,
    All sound creators, post here and say: My sounds are public domain, use it in any way you want!

  • avatar
    121 sounds
    1545 posts


    hey,

    freesound 2, see http://www.freesound.org/blog/
    will support the PD license.

    - Bram

    Warning: if you break the rules, see my avatar. Freesound Admin, Moderator, Ex-Freesound-Coder & Benevolent Dictator For Life.
  • avatar
    1 sound
    12 posts


    Yes I know, but its not there now ....
    If it will support PD probabaly its a good idea to give soundcontributers to switch the license of all their contributions at once.

  • avatar
    121 sounds
    1545 posts


    that's the idea!

    i.e. give all freesound authors a simple page that lets them change the license for all their sounds to one of the new licenses.

    - Bram

    Warning: if you break the rules, see my avatar. Freesound Admin, Moderator, Ex-Freesound-Coder & Benevolent Dictator For Life.
  • avatar
    1 sound
    12 posts


    Great grin grin

    Do it now ! :wink:

  • avatar
    18 sounds
    456 posts


    Is it possible to change licenses? CC licenses are non-revocable (see http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#What_if_I_change_my_mind.3F ). I can see it could be possible to change to a less strict license (for example, I license a photo by-nc-nd, then change it to by only; or indeed from sampling+ to pd), but certainly not the other way round.

  • avatar
    121 sounds
    1545 posts


    nemoDaedalus: Ugh, this is a rather badly-replied FAQ, it needs an addendum!

    You can't change your mind about material already out there - i.e. if you release an album under "attribution" people can distribute it under that license no matter what. If you suddenly change the album to "all rights reserved (C)", this doesn't stop people from distributing your cd under the "attribution" license. Neither does it stop you from selling your CD with an "all rights reserved" license!

    However, you as the original author always have the right to re-releasing the material with a different license. This doesn't stop the original licensed copies to be distributed under that particular license, but it might give even more freedom!

    Think about this: you release your samples under "non-commercial". A hospital (commercial entity!) comes by and asks if they can use your sounds to enlighten the moods of their patients. You can grant the hospital the license, even though you have previously said "no commercial usage!". Does that change the license out there? No.

    That said, I'm not sure if going from Sampling+ to attribution-noncommercial gives more or less freedom, but at least attribution-noncommercial is clearer than sampling+. smile

    - Bram

    Warning: if you break the rules, see my avatar. Freesound Admin, Moderator, Ex-Freesound-Coder & Benevolent Dictator For Life.
  • avatar
    15 sounds
    135 posts


    qubodup has released his sounds into the public domain:

    http://www.freesound.org/usersViewSingle.php?id=71257

    UPDATE: I got around to putting my few sounds up in PD.(I will get around sometime to putting more up. Hopefully more useful ones as well)

    I agree CC can be too restrictive on legit projects, though I could see why someone wouldn't want to public domain as well. People can technically say they made those sounds and take credit as their own when its public domain.(which is really lame)

    I just wish they had something that releases sounds and requires no credit, but stops someone from selling samples to people
    exclusively when they were already public domain or claiming credit of the original sample. Kind of like open source programs.

    But to me the benefits seem to out weigh the negatives.

    And even though you don't have to it would be nice to tell someone who public domains their sounds what your using them for.

  • avatar
    121 sounds
    1545 posts


    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

    Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

    # Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

    What we could o in freesound 2.0 is have a special field in the user preferences that asks:

    Do you want to be attributed/credited when people user your sounds?
    * no, I don't need to be credited
    * yes, then define how you want to be credited: [......]

    Then on each of the the sample page we could easily add this.

    - Bram

    Warning: if you break the rules, see my avatar. Freesound Admin, Moderator, Ex-Freesound-Coder & Benevolent Dictator For Life.
  • avatar
    412 sounds
    40 posts


    titi2
    Hi, freesound.org is a great ressource for sound samples, but it only supports this one license up to now.
    With this license for example free GPL games can NOT use these sounds.( thats currently my problem ).

    I don't get it.

    You are free:

    To sample, mash-up, or otherwise creatively transform this work for commercial or noncommercial purposes.
    To perform, display, and distribute copies of this whole work for noncommercial purposes (e.g., file-sharing or noncommercial webcasting).

    Please explain where the problem lies with Free GPL games.

    I'm in favour of PD anyway.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    15 sounds
    135 posts


    On your ideas Bram, I'm not sure if that might end up just making things more confusing. If people release something CC 3.0 but then say they don't need crediting wouldn't that just create more confusion? Or maybe someone could switch the terms back and forth and then go after someone who originally thought they could use sounds without crediting but now is told they need to credit. (maybe that's paranoida)

    I wish CC had a license that was your free to use these samples in anyway without crediting but you can't sell the individual samples/ or claim copyright on them. That could probably somehow lead to issues anyway. Seems like Public Domain keeps it simple, and most people will probably know who a faker or ripoff person is that claims the samples their's...

    That option to tell how people want to be credited though for users releasing under CC 3.0 sounds like a good idea and might make it easier for people to properly follow the written legal speak of it. Then again it sounds like a headache to implement and people might not read the part of each author's attribution requirements. One thought is to have a blanket statement like "all sounds posted by users from Freesound under a CC license should be credited by "Sample from username from Freesound.org" Kind of creates a standardized crediting system.

  • avatar
    18 sounds
    456 posts


    You basically can release something under a CC license and let people use it without attribution, I think.

    Bram
    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
    Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

    # Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

    So if you add a line to your file's description like: "I hereby give everybody who reads this line explicit permission to use this work without any attribution; all other conditions as described in the CC license still apply."

  • avatar
    1 sound
    12 posts


    I would be really happy to see lots of sounds in the public domain.
    Kind people will usually credit the authors but when you create a sound mix for example and use 500 sounds for it it's really a mess to credit everyone.
    If you create a game(or even a mod) you have lots of soundmixes using hundrets of sounds and the same with pictures/textures too.
    You can print a book to credit everyone correctly and get a bunch of license .....
    That's why PD is so good. You can really use the sounds in anyway you want.
    For the same reason I started to release lots of my pictures(useful for 3d-game textures) to the public domain at http://www.burningwell.org.

    I hope freesound 2.0 will be there soon ( and every artist will be initially asked if he will release his sounds into the public domain).

  • avatar
    15 sounds
    135 posts


    While I agree public domain is great, there are sounds that could be released freely for people to use but that they couldn't technically release as public domain. Like say someone writes an audio snippet with a company's synth. You can't technically put that audio into the public domain, because you don't own the synth, but I think you could let people freely use the actual composition of notes created with the synth in most cases.(not sure) There are probably still a few issues even with the CC, like not being able to use single synth notes from a sounds release to put in your own product, but its a better and more accurate guide than PD.

  • avatar
    1 sound
    12 posts


    People can NOT use their created sounds when they use copyrighted sounds!
    This is the way it is and this is the reason why there should be as much as possible of free public domain sounds!
    These are typically recorded/generated ones, not arranged ones from exsiting sounds!

    Thats exactly the big problem! All this damn copyrighted stuff! Every sound snippet is copyrighted today!
    The only way you can do something today is by only using your self created stuff! ( or public domain base sounds/recordings! )

  • avatar
    0 sounds
    2 posts


    I too would like it very much if there was a possiblity for the authors to change all their work to a free license, it does not HAVE to be PD, but GPL,WTFPL or similar "Copy, share, edit, give away, sell" Free/Libre license would be very nice, so we can use the sounds in Free Software games smile

    It is also very important to notify sound authors of this situation so we can have sounds that are usable in free software smile

  • avatar
    1118 sounds
    402 posts


    soundhead
    While I agree public domain is great, there are sounds that could be released freely for people to use but that they couldn't technically release as public domain. Like say someone writes an audio snippet with a company's synth. You can't technically put that audio into the public domain, because you don't own the synth, but I think you could let people freely use the actual composition of notes created with the synth in most cases.(not sure)

    You're saying that sounds created via software are owned by the software creator? This is not right. Words I write are not owned by my pen or keyboard maker. Adobe doesn't own your image if you make it in Photoshop.

    Or do I misunderstand?

    Do you want to be attributed/credited when people user your sounds?
    * no, I don't need to be credited
    * yes, then define how you want to be credited: [......]

    I thought you would directly give people a choice for each sound (with a default setting, as in Flickr for example).

    It would be good if the pd-choice would be explained in the way that it makes apparent why pd-licensing makes it easier for editors (no need to keep track of attribution).

    This might be sound strange but would you consider adding a minimalistic, easy-to-read license, in the spirit of BSD/MIT/zlib?

    It could be like this (based on the ISC license):

    Copyright (c) Year(s), Company or Person's Name <E-mail address>

    Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this sound for any
    purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
    copyright notice and this permission notice is enclosed with all copies.

    THE SOUND IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES
    WITH REGARD TO THIS SOUND INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
    MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR
    ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES
    WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN
    ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF
    OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOUND.

    This requires attribution in form of the copyright notice, but is compatible with all free software/media licenses I ever heard of. ^^

    PS: I'm glad to see 2.0 coming closer of course smile

    PPS: Bram, you mentioned CC-BY-NC. Does this mean you plan to use that license as the default in the future?

    Click here to lend your support to: Freesound 2011 donations and make a donation at www.pledgie.com !
    Donate to Freesound.org
    so it can serve even more and better sounds to you in the future!
  • avatar
    15 sounds
    135 posts



    You're saying that sounds created via software are owned by the software creator? This is not right. Words I write are not owned by my pen or keyboard maker. Adobe doesn't own your image if you make it in Photoshop.

    Or do I misunderstand?

    What I mean is say you record something use a program like Garritan Orchestral. Your using audio samples they specifically recorded. Most of these kinds of programs let you freely create music and use it for almost anything. What they don't allow you to do is just take one shot samples and sell/share the individual samples because that kills their market.
    So if you end up writing something with their program you can give away the arrangement of notes you created. But let's say you wrote something that's a slow passage and put it up on Freesound. Someone could technically yank one or more single shot notes and basically use those singular samples that are really just Garritan Orchestral's.

    I was thinking public domain is worse because your saying someone can do absolutely anything with PD and you've ended up saying the samples you put up are PD when in fact you really don't have the right to do that with those singular samples. But really the attribution 2.0 license isn't really much better for these situations. With Attribution You haven't specifically said those sounds are in the public domain but it is still open to abuse/ unapproved use of samples. I haven't looked too closely at it but maybe the CC attribution -No derivatives covers this but it also sounds like it restricts the use of sounds that could be used in legitimate ways.(like using a smaller passage instead of the whole passage)

  • avatar
    103 sounds
    195 posts


    I suggest to read the first topic in this "Legal help and Attribution questions", "sampling digital synths"
    http://www.freesound.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47

    my two cents on PD: I like the CC license used in Freesound because it's a chance for communication between someone which share a sound and some other which need that sound. with PD there are no contacts, no authors, no social values.
    I understand the problem of attribution in video/radio/game works: but, if you save time (and money) using sounds created by others, then you could use part of the saved time to contact the authors asking permission for a specific use. this appear as a fair trade to me wink

  • avatar
    0 sounds
    2 posts


    cajo
    I understand the problem of attribution in video/radio/game works: but, if you save time (and money) using sounds created by others, then you could use part of the saved time to contact the authors asking permission for a specific use. this appear as a fair trade to me wink

    Thing is, what happens in 10 years, if the original author loses interest in the sounds he created/leaves this site/changes email/get run over by a bus? Then the sounds are "lost", in that nobody will be able to have them released under a free license.

    Also, asking premission for a specific use means that the sounds will be re-released under a inherently non-free license, since, a free license implicitly states that the content is available for all kinds of use aslong as redistributed under the same free license/compatible license, and as long as the authror is still credited.

    Specific use = non-free = not usable as content in am open-source game/movie/program/music-track.

    I do agree with you that Public Domain is the best choice, any free/libre license will do smile And in that way the author of the sound is assured credits for his work.

    20 posts