I realize that you don’t offer legal advice, but I’m hoping you can help me in the right direction.

I’ve created a remix of David Byrne’s "My Fair Lady" that I want to include on an upcoming album. If I understand correctly, I’m free to do so under the Sampling Plus license 1.0 that allows commercial use of derivitive works. Is that really it, though, or should I contact someone representing Mr. Byrne regarding the track before I include it on the album.

The licence states that one "must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor." Where can I find specific info as to what Mr. Byrne’s wishes were in this regard. Or is there a generic example I can look at for liner notes on the CD.

Like most people, I’m new to CC and just want to make sure that I understood correctly.

Sorry I don’t have an answer for you. I just wanted to say I really enjoyed your FM mix (Chinese Ambient?) and look forward to your uploads. : )

Great question though.

Haha, that’s Chinese Chill ;-) Thanks so much. I’ll definitely be posting stuff here - just want to get the album out first. Hmmm, the Crammed Contest looks tasty, though…

I’m just a great David Byrne fan and having a track with him on my album would be a dream come true. But I’d hate to pi$$ him off, or worse, get into legal trouble because I misunderstood the CC license…

In Holland this same license is much more simple:
Quote: De gebruiker dient bij het werk de door de maker of de licentiegever aangegeven naam te vermelden.


Something like:
The user needs to state the author’s or license-holder’s name for this work.

Please use common sense. Without this, nothing is possible. If you clearly state you sampled the track of David you should be doing all the things needed for this license. I can see no issue at all with this.

Creative Commons should make things more simple, not the other way around. Common sense is a very important thing. Also for example to decide what is commercial use and what is not.

I hope this helps :)

I would argue that understanding CC needs a new kind of common sense. Traditional common sense tells me that no famous living artist would allow use of their work without expecting remuneration. Because the Sampling Plus license seems to stand this on its head, I kept looking for something I missed in the legal code. But that’s the whole point of CC, right?

This is remarkably perfect topic for this list:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/ma...

Taking legal advice from the web (especially remix forums) is probably a really bad idea.

VS