AltSci Cell

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

by Javantea
Oct 6, 2013

I went to the EMP again yesterday. I blogged about the first trip, so what's new? I played by myself. This is my third and fourth time on a real drumset. I've signed up for my first drum lessons this week at Seattle Drum School through their very reasonable Groupon. I plan to take a handful of lessons so that I can get some direction. I've been invited to play in a band. That makes two informal invitations and I'm currently not very good at the drums. But I'm kinda destined to become decent at the drums, I can honestly say that it'll happen. So these early recordings are going to become really valuable, right? Nope. They're going to become Creative Commons.

2013-10-05 16:11:24 by Javantea is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://sono.us/cc.

2013-10-05 16:11:24

• FLAC (15 MB)
• Ogg Vorbis (7 MB)
• MP3 (5.8M MB)

2013-10-05 16:33:31 by Javantea is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://sono.us/cc.

2013-10-05 16:33:31

• FLAC (23 MB)
• Ogg Vorbis (11 MB)
• MP3 (8.4 MB)

I am officially licensing all my music from the start with the most liberal license I can use. Download it, share it, link to it, mix it, sell it, yodel to it if pleases you. I created it, played it, shared it, and that's all I intend to do. The Creative Commons license says that you should attribute me if you use it. I know that can be a bother, so if you use it without attributing me, I won't think too much about it. I mean to say if your project is so big that it uses my samples, I'm not going to say anything if I hear my samples and don't see any attribution. So why Creative Commons? First of all, there's the argument of standing on the shoulders of giants. I learned some stuff from commercially licensed software and I paid for it. I have listened to a ton of freely licensed music. I've listened to a bunch of commercially licensed music. I cannot afford to buy a lot of music. I've bought about $55 of music in the past 5 years. That's right, I'm not supporting the musicians that I like so well. Why not spend $200 more? That $200 could support a bunch of other stuff. So long as I can stand my music, tunes.io, DI.fm, C895, KEXP, Youtube, and other free sources of music, I'm going to listen to them instead of buying music. When I really like a song, I can listen to it a few times for free. Then if I really, really like it I can buy it. But what about rare music? That's right, one of my albums I found online couldn't be purchased for money. So yeah, that's an exception. I would honestly pay money for one of my albums, but I can't. So that's where Creative Commons comes in. People who like music don't always have money, so they go with free sources of music. But then there's a data source that was originally commercial but is no longer "in print" which doesn't make sense with a digital market unless you are literally incapable of digitizing and storing all the volume of awesome music. So Amazon isn't going to be selling 2013-10-05 by Javantea any time soon. If Amazon isn't selling it, you can guess that this music isn't going very far. One way to get music to go a bit further is to license it with Creative Commons, so that people that like music or that have a certain mission can feel free to copy it as music as they need to listen to it.

You can clearly see the case for Creative Commons when an artist is just starting out. But when a person releases their first album, they feel like they've put a lot of work into it. You want to sell your album so you can ditch the day job and buy a new guitar so you can smash the old one, right? Why use Creative Commons then? Independent artists who have no label or a label that is not a multi-billion dollar RIAA member need fans. How do you get fans? You play for them. How do you play for them? You set up gigs, you advertise, and you get radio stations to play your music. People who like your music when they hear it on the radio will hunt you down so that they can hear you live or buy your music. But if the DJ of the radio station didn't get a free copy of your music, how is s/he going to know what it sounds like? When you advertise your music, you've got to give it away one way or another. Creative Commons makes that super easy for your fans to give it to their friends. I mean, if they like your music, they're going to give it away whether it's Creative Commons or not. Creative Commons just makes that a no-brainer.

Unfortunately that is not as clear an argument for Creative Commons as any of the other arguments. There's a good educational commercial about it. There's even a movie about the people who Mix stuff.

On Friday, I saw Tacocat, Peach Kelly Pop, and Acapulco Lips with a couple of friends. It was very inspiring to see such wonderful musicians play five feet away from us. At one point, I was 3 feet from the band, I was right up in their faces. It was wonderful.

Javantea out.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlJRrVcACgkQpmRrABlU/tLpqQCgkV+x3zehJ+2O7FTusys7glF6
+YYAn3ghxYDILcAVWkO3spsv5H4T4WVw
=8x0E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----