Hi all, Would like to seek your opinion. I discovered this website http://beemp3.com offering my CC-licensed music for downloads. It's allowed under my CC license, but problem is that they've only indicated my name and not a link back to my website.
It seems Beemp3.com trawls www.archive.org and odeo.com (two sites where I make my music available) and puts the audio file on their server for download. Their item display page shows a link back to www.archive.org or odeo.com but not my site. In my item description, I've stated cleared how the music should be attributed, which they've clearly not done so.
I intend to write to the beemp3.com site owner. Basically politely tell them it's cool my music is being offered but they have to link back to the website I specified. In the meantime, would appreciate any comments or suggestion in any area. E.g. any other information I should tell them
BTW, if they are re-distributing a CC-licensed work, do they need to indicate that it's CC-licensed?
Actually the license does not enforce the format in which the
attribution must be shown. Technically if they just show your name,
it is all right. I think your best best is to email them and ask them
to link back to your site. Most of these guys who just spider stuff
are too lazy to bother with proper attribution.
We had a similar case at GlobalVocies couple of years back where
someone just lifted the entire article and posted on a site. The guy
just added a line of text below "via globalvoices". The way we argued
is that he was not adding any value to the content, just replicating
it. I think we got his ISP to remove the stuff.
If your email to him fails, I think you can go to his ISP. Though he
can argue that he is adding value by making the music mobile enabled.
On Jun 8, 6:58 pm, Ivan Chew <ramblinglibrar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Would like to seek your opinion. I discovered this websitehttp://beemp3.comoffering my CC-licensed music for downloads. It's
> allowed under my CC license, but problem is that they've only
> indicated my name and not a link back to my website.
> It seems Beemp3.com trawlswww.archive.organd odeo.com (two sites
> where I make my music available) and puts the audio file on their
> server for download. Their item display page shows a link back towww.archive.orgor odeo.com but not my site. In my item description,
> I've stated cleared how the music should be attributed, which they've
> clearly not done so.
> I intend to write to the beemp3.com site owner. Basically politely
> tell them it's cool my music is being offered but they have to link
> back to the website I specified. In the meantime, would appreciate any
> comments or suggestion in any area. E.g. any other information I
> should tell them
> BTW, if they are re-distributing a CC-licensed work, do they need to
> indicate that it's CC-licensed?
Hi Preetam, You're right in that they were lazy. They did link and credit to the main source of their MP3. But it's not the right way in which I've specified how I want my work to be credited.
Technically if they just show your name, it is all right.
I think this is where there may be ambiguity.
At the generic BY license page, the text says: "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)." http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0
The generic license is more specific than the SG one, it seems. Something I'll check with CC-HQ soon.
Anyway, I think the CC BY license does say the manner of attribution should be in the way the author wants it to be. http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/ "You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your copyrighted work and derivative works based upon it but only if they give credit the way you request."
> If your email to him fails, I think you can go to his ISP. Though he > can argue that he is adding value by making the music mobile enabled.
Thanks for the tip. I'd not considered that. I've written to the site owner and will email another time. Last resort is to write to their ISP.
Hi everyone, Just to close off this case. The site owner replied that they have removed all listings of my songs. No other explanations given. I guess they decided it was less of a hassle to not display it rather than change their display format. Or maybe they don't get CC. :)
Cheers Ivan
On 6/21/09, Ivan Chew <ramblinglibrar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Preetam, > You're right in that they were lazy. They did link and credit to the > main source of their MP3. But it's not the right way in which I've > specified how I want my work to be credited.
> Technically if they just show your name, it is all right.
> I think this is where there may be ambiguity.
> At the generic BY license page, the text says: "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)." > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0
> The generic license is more specific than the SG one, it seems. > Something I'll check with CC-HQ soon.
> Anyway, I think the CC BY license does say the manner of attribution > should be in the way the author wants it to be. > http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/ > "You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your > copyrighted work and derivative works based upon it but only if > they give credit the way you request."
>> If your email to him fails, I think you can go to his ISP. Though he >> can argue that he is adding value by making the music mobile enabled.
> Thanks for the tip. I'd not considered that. I've written to the site > owner and will email another time. > Last resort is to write to their ISP.
