On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, MJ Ray wrote:
Ian Bell:
The important thing is that the concept is being fed to a broader audience rather than what the correct term for it is. Let's all try to say GNU Linux from now on eh?
Indeed, but if you start referring to "Open Source Music", surely you just mean music for which the sheet music is available and you can make your own arrangements of? Hardly a new concept.
Again, as the writer of that particular article already pointed out, there is no such thing as 'open source music', since even though the tracks may be available for free, they aren't the 'source' (i.e. every bit of sound generating module, scores, patches, even instruments). The very point of 'open source' is well, it -is- the source. Code. Not arbitrarily arranged bits of sound. The platform of open music is mainly used by musicians who want exposure, which all power to them, but this article was just a bit of populist garbage meant to bring new scientist to younger (and perhaps even dilluded) audiences. It isn't Stallman. It's just recent bad sales.
DC
david casal --0+ --- d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+ --- www.ariada.uea.ac.uk/~dcasal --)+