[Foundation-l] Dream a little...

[Gerard Meijssen]

P. Birken wrote:
> 2006/10/15, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>:
>
>   
>> How about recordings of out of copyright (i.e. classical)  music?  The
>> only rights holder should be whomever recorded it and whomever they
>> signed agreements with in order to be permitted to record it.  There
>> are a number of small record labels such as [[Nimbus Records]] as well
>> as the concert halls themselves which have large libraries of music.
>> I think this would only be worthwhile as a funded endeavor if it could
>> land us a truly massive archive which would enable us to illustrate a
>> majority of our articles on long-dead composers.
>>     
>
> Classical music recordings are what I would call the classical
> copyright nightmare. It might be possible to get solo pieces under a
> free licence, but orchestra pieces... I talked to a Conductor of the
> local university orchestra about putting some of their recordings
> under a free license. You have to get forty people (the recorders) to
> put this under a free licence. The next part is that while the music
> is free, orchestras usually rent the notes from some music publishing
> company (because it's too expensive to buy a complete set of notes for
> every piece). These companies in turn put demands on your use of their
> notes, most often fees for commercial use, which would in a way apply
> if you put this under the GNU-FDL or CC-by-SA.
>
> Nevertheless, it sounds like a good idea to fund a piano player to
> record the major Bach, Beethoven and Mozart piano pieces.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Philipp
Hoi,
When it is not possible to play a piece by Haydn Mozart Rossini because 
there is no music available, we should SCAN these works and digitize 
them. When we have done this, we should make them available. When we 
make these works available, it will become easier to perform these 
works. As more material becomes easily available, more music will be 
played. This in term will stimulate the performance of music.

The performance of music by amateur musicians is imho more important 
than to have another performance by an acknowledged master performer. I 
think that popular music is popular because it is easy to get a band 
together and just play. When it is EASY to get the music, it will become 
easy to perform.. Remember Bach was a composer and his compositions were 
first and foremost consumables. When it is easy to just have another 
piece of music when you decide you do not like the one you have, the 
entry level to music will be lowered and music will become less of a 
consumable and more participatory.

When you invest money, you have to consider what you want to achieve 
with it.. When I buy music I want my violin concerto performed by Maxim 
Vengerov or I might buy the latest Patti Smith. When I were to invest 
money, I would consider what WE should spend money on, what would help 
US. Our success exist because of us cooperating. When we invest, it 
should make us stronger. We do not get stronger by paying royalties; we 
get stronger by investing in the restoration of the same material and we 
should only invest in it when we Free this material at the same time. 
When we are to invest in politicking, I would echo Elian and have "Free 
Donald and Mickey" be our battle cry.

I would echo Danny where he wants to spend serious money into our 
hardware; there are many challenges that can be overcome with ample 
funding, I would however spend a lot more money in the development of 
our software. So many dreams are not realised because there is nobody 
willing to consider it, willing to code it. Much functionality is 
unlikely to get coded because it is just too much work.

Yes, we can spend $100.000.000,- but let us spend it in a way that makes 
us stronger. When we show that we can spend wisely, it will be the 
beginning of something great; the restoration of a participatory 
society. When we spend wisely, we will be trusted with much more money.

Thanks,
    Gerard