Freesound Forums

Just a question about the samples that are currently on here relased under the sampling + license. Will they still have that license? I know some people will go with the attribution license(which is more open) but others will want non commercial attribution only. Will people be allowed to display those under non commercial attribution only? It would sound unfair to do this since they already released it under the sampling + license which is more open in some ways to people. Just curious how the transition would work.

Just a side note on sampling+ license: I think one other reason the Sampling + license was used is for people who make sounds and want to release them freely but only in the sense that someone has to do something musically creative with them. In this way they stop people from taking sounds to make sampling libraries or use them individually in a movie but still give people the ability throw them into musical compositions if used in creative sampling way. One problem though is it gets annoyingly confusing when you consider someone using those samples in a song and then using their music as a soundtrack to a movie. They have to make sure that the sampling + licensed part is not the only part that gets used in the movie otherwise it might violate that license. But I guess it was made for people who want to release their sounds with some musical use but protection from sample libraries being made, or their work being exploited just for a movie.

Someone already raised the question about the sounds already in the library. I think the contributors should be able to choose the license for their samples already in collection if they want to move out of sampling+.

On the other hand it must be made sure that this change should be done only once. Once the sample is under one license it should not be moved to some other. It would really mix up everything badly and you could not be sure of anything.

I think the idea of leaving things open for negotiation is great. Lets face it, any licence is negotiable. _but_ in my opinion, if the site gets the reputation of being a place where sounds are "available for non-commercial use" it will seriously discourage potential users... no one wants to think about legal negotiations before they even listen to a sound... and that's exactly what users will face if your sounds are licenced NC. People will be asking themselves "what if my sound creation becomes commercial? what then?"

If an NC licence is going to be part of the mix I recommend that freesound provide some kind of support system on the site for making it very clear that negotiations are possible and welcome. I'm not sure what form this could take.. a user selectable "negotiations welcome" icon next to the sound's licence would be a good start.

Just ideas...

Ross.

I make loads of sounds, if I want another one, I just make it...
It's so easy just to record a sound, sample a synth, make a sound...
So if someone wants to use my sounds in their art.... Why not?
I can't make their art a success with a few sounds, or even all of the sounds. It requires far more time talent and inspired thought to make something from a few waves that will appeal to people in general.

Free sound for everyone!

It's only tools...

How on earth would one enforce any type of copyright anyhow?
One could just slightly change the sample, and it'd be a new sample... Copyright free!

I struggled for years as a budding producer until I learnt to make my own high quality waves...
I don't see why other young (or not so young) people should.

Hi all,

first up, I voted attribution. Second up, I have not had time to read this whole thread, so apologies if I am reposting earlier comments.

I run an audio/music production company in edinburgh. Giving people credit is not only essential, it is common courtesy. If I am pottering around at home making beats on my laptop, then I'm not really too concerned where the samples come from as this is just for me and will never leave my laptop. However, if I am working on a commercial project in the studio, I note down where everything comes from. Other people who create sound/music deserve to be contacted and credited properly if I use some of their material. I would like/expect others to do the same for me.

I think the attribution vote was the right one for me because I am trying to run a commercial enterprise.

Anyway - Bram, thanks for bringing this up... (See what you've started?! ;-p)

non-commercial is a bad joke in my opinion.
also attribution would keep me from beeing able to use this library, it's just too much of a hassle...
come on guys, it's just samples, let's share! --> public domain

I prefer "attribution-non-commercial" cause is very important to share samples and that everyone can use them for his non-commercial porpouse.

Regards

Bassik

noid
non-commercial is a bad joke in my opinion.
also attribution would keep me from beeing able to use this library, it's just too much of a hassle...
come on guys, it's just samples, let's share! --> public domain

just an idea... there seem to be two types of freesound users, people that are into sharing, uploaders and regular members and others, occasionnal downloaders. Could there be two types of users that could have access to two types of licenses? If, by example you contribute regularly to freesound, you can have access to a less restrictive license...

Attribution is nothing for some but for others like me, it's like Noid says, to much of a hassle and not realistic (sorry Bram!). I would have major hesitations to justify thanking FS for it's contribution in the credits... If FS goes with a combination of 3 licenses... it should be simple and easy.

What I like about FS or something else depending, is a community of passionate sound people that are willing to share there knowledge, experience, ressources and sounds so that it extends the barriers of their "art" and help them to become bether.

We are better together than alone.

Hmmm... on the one hand:

martypinso
I would have major hesitations to justify thanking FS for it's contribution in the credits

martypinso
We are better together than alone.

I don't get that.

Deleted, double posted, silly me.

.milan
Hmmm... on the one hand:

martypinso
I would have major hesitations to justify thanking FS for it's contribution in the credits

But on the other:

martypinso
We are better together than alone.

So, FS brings us together, and that's better -- but not good enough to acknowledge them for?

I don't get that.

even though I recognise the great help FS can be for me I am not able to properly credit FS for all their contributions in the final credit of a film, I would not have any problem to credit FS somewhere else then in the credit. I work on main streams feature films and tv series where the credit is very delicate and political. We can't attribute for one or several sounds we use on freesound in the film credit. I would rather pay and not have to comply to that, and going back to each owner of sound to ask them if I can take it for nothing is just not productive enough for me. Maybe, FS is not what I am looking for... but I feel it's a shame. When I gave sounds to FS, don't tell me that everybody that downloaded my sounds is going to credit me personnaly in the credit... I don't believe it. If we are sharing sounds why not share it freely. I am pretty certain that most of professionnal sound designers won't realisticly be able to credit FS for every sample they take. I am just surprised to realise I am the only one bringing this up...

id like to use public domain- noncommercial

meaning...you can do whatever you like with my samples....i uploaded them for you to use! go ahead.
BUT ..... you cant use them for commercial usage you corporate whore! :wink:

"If we are sharing sounds why not share it freely"

sharing
adj 1: sharing equally with another or others
2: unselfishly willing to share with others; "a warm and
sharing friend"
n 1: having in common; "the sharing of electrons creates
molecules"
2: using or enjoying something jointly with others
3: sharing thoughts and feelings
4: a distribution in shares
---
In which sense this applies to pros unwilling to credit FS? Even Mr Burns says 'Excellent!' every now and then...

martypinso
I would not have any problem to credit FS somewhere else then in the credit.

Where, for example?

.milan

martypinso
I would not have any problem to credit FS somewhere else then in the credit.

Where, for example?

on FS site? on my website? I don't know! I understand your concerns, I respect it, I just can't realisticly and systematicly comply to it...

I want to use "attribution" and "attribution-noncommercial" depending on the sample.

That works best for my tastes and purposes.

Do we have an idea of when the change will be made? I have a couple of sounds I'm holding off u/l till the new system is in place, if it's going to be a matter of a couple of weeks. If it's likely to be months, well, heck, I'm not going to sweat this issue.

On the subject of credits, I have some sympathy with people that say it's unrealistic to credit every sound on the credit roll. The movie might end up with 10 mins of credits. And there are media that this wouldn't work for at all. For instance, if the product were a CD, you don't normally get a spoken credit roll at the end of a CD, unless its of a radio play. Can we come up with another way for attribution - a web listing linked from the movie site or similar? I'm not personally so fussed by an individual listing, but I do think a freesound web credit and some log of what was used would be useful to see what kinds of sounds are applied. At the moment I have no idea of where FS sounds end up in, particularly commercial products. It would be nice to be able to see a listing like that on here at least.

If freesound sounds are used in a movie, either they use public domain sounds, either they ask the authors individually on alternative ways to credit them, either they directly credit the people in the movie.

It's clear. Maybe it's not possible, ok , i understand. Then go for search only public domain.

Another option is to add a line in credits with an url to a website on where u place all the names of the people from who you took sounds. I am not sure, tho, if the license forces to credit on the Derivated Work itself, or not.

I think the offer of freesound is nice enough as to be able to ask, at least, for attribution, those who want to ask for it.

If this put them out of the professional film industry, then they should be aware of it, and change the license if they want.

We have to understand that for many people in Freesound, this is a good way of promoting their work and sharing sounds at the same time.

There is nothing bad on wanting to work making sounds, nothing bad on wanting to make money of this. Those who do this as a hobby need to understand that others want to live of this, of sound. And to live of sound is respectable. I don't mind to think about Freesound as a promotional tool for many. Free and commercial con live together in harmony.

As it seems everyone haves different points of view and needings, i still vote for the three: attr, attr non comm AND public domain

And of course the search option wich allows you to search only for public domain, in order to avoid the problems of giving credit, or contacting the author for alternative solutions.

There shall be space for all, and Freesound should be able to get together a big group of individuals with very different points of view.

Or at least this is my oppinion.

Thanks for sharing yours with us.
Take care.

As a contributor to Freesound, I’d like the license to be as “Free” as possible, but with a caveat that Public Domain doesn’t offer: I don’t want my sounds re-sold in another collection of sounds.

I am happy if people use my sounds in their “for profit project”, and I hope it helps them out. I have been told by a number of people that sounds I’ve uploaded are being used on their CD, film or game. I think that’s great. These are typically small people trying to make a living at what they love to do and I am very happy to help them out. If I can get a credit, I’m even happier because that helps me out in the long run, but I understand that that is not always possible.

People need to make a living. Creative people already have things stacked against them, so why should we make things more difficult for them. If people aren’t allowed to use Freesound sounds in their commercial work, then Freesound’s use is limited to hobbyists. I think that would be a real shame. It’s not as if McDonalds and Walmart have been pillaging Freesound to further their plot for world domination. Freesound users are mostly just regular people trying to do what they love to do, and some are lucky enough to make money while doing it. Let’s not tie their hands.

As someone else pointed out, none of the proposed licenses give the creator of the sound the option to deny use on a moral ground. So, the suggestion that by using Attribution-Non-Commercial, it is more likely that the end user contact the creator so that he/she would then have the opportunity to deny usage on moral grounds, is, I think, a bit of wishful thinking. More likely the end user will just go someplace else.

Which brings me to my second comment:

As a working professional in the audio field, I think Freesound is a great resource, but I have not yet downloaded any sounds to use in a project. The reason for this is because it is impossible for me to give credit to the creator of the sounds. I get a TV show a few days or a couple weeks before the air date. Usually the picture has already been edited, and on many occasions, my name isn’t even in the credits.

If there were some special sound here that I could not find a sound on another source, I would contact the creator and hope to get their permission to use the sound. But like I said, with such short deadline, I can’t count on getting permission in time, so I end up going elsewhere for sounds.

So in summary: I’ll have to vote for Attribution because it’s the most free, without going over that cliff of Public Domain which forfeits all of my rights to my sounds.

-Richard

holaa Richard! ..very well sayd!

for the same reason i voted Attribution myself

the others seems simply unappropriate for the Freesound poroject ..imho