Re: registering a composition

[David Kastrup]

antlists <address@hidden> writes:

> On 22/05/2020 13:26, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> IIUC, CC licences aim to protect against others making money from
>> your work.  How is "ASCAP not being happy" related to that?
>> 
>
>> Unless I'm mistaken, LilyPond (GNU) and CC belong to the "eco-system"
>> where sharing is the norm (to enhance the common cultural pool) while
>> making it hard for "free-riders".  Using the tools offered by that alternate
>> system, and then bow to the arguments of those who smear it seems a
>> contradiction.
>> 
> You're correct that GNU and CC belong to the eco-system where sharing
> is the norm, but NEITHER have any objection to others making making
> money (yes they do both object to free-riders).
>
> CC has an *optional* clause that forbids commercial activity (I use it
> on my photos), and GNU forbids charging for THE SOFTWARE.

Uh, no?  GNU allows you to charge whatever price you can get for the
software.  It does not allow you to charge _extra_ for the source code
or for the right to retain a license under the GPL.  Source code (or the
right to it) and the license always have to be part of the sale.

Companies like RedHat grew by _selling_ CDs with GNU software on them,
at a price point where undercutting them with copies of their disks
would not have been a compelling business proposition.  But they still
turned a profit from doing it well and at large scale.

> But CC doesn't forbid commercial activity by default, and GNU permits
> charging for services, such as supplying the software, supporting the
> software, and anything like that.

And selling CDs at arbitrary price point with GPLed GNU software on
them.

-- 
David Kastrup