Remixes, Attribution, Creative Alchemies: The Long Tail in Acts of Kindness (part 2)

Continued from Part 1:

THE 'WHY' QUESTION
I get a kick out of the creative process.

I've come to realise that's the basis of why I create. Of having seemingly created something out of nothing; moulding ideas into something that can be seen/ heard/ experienced.

But beyond the initial post-creative euphoria, I will wonder if all my time and effort was worth it. The inevitable “What’s the point” rhetoric.

Luckily, once in a while, something like this comes along. Reminding me that it's worth it.



It's not new to have a video using my CC-licensed music as the soundtrack.

But what's new to me was the user being a company rather than an individual hobbyist.

Red Maps seem like a start-up firm. At least, not a huge conglomerate with a global household brand name (I do hope they become one though).

Still, to have a for-profit company using my work meant that my work had to be of a certain quality. No company worth their salt would want to be associated with low-quality music in their video. For a for-profit outfit to use my work, I consider that as affirmation of something.


REDEFINING WHAT IS 'BEING PAID'
When I started posting my work online, I haboured hopes that my talents might be discovered. And that I'd earn big bucks.

But the idea of "being paid" has become, to me, less about money. It is more about affirmation from others, which serves as a yardstick for my journey of self-expression.

The skeptic in me would say that all that is merely an exercise in self-massaging the ego. Nonetheless, we all have our own reasons for sharing and giving. And expectations as well.

I can't speak for everyone else who share their works under Creative Commons licenses. My primary motivation, if you can call it that, can be summed up as follows:

• I create, as part of my journey towards self-actualisation.
• Since the work already here, I might as well let others benefit.

Creative Commons provided that framework for sharing. A framework that I understood and was comfortable with.


LONG TAIL TO ACTS OF KINDNESS
I believe there might be a Long Tail to acts of kindness.

"An example of a power law graph showing popularity ranking. To the right is the long tail; to the left are the few that dominate. Notice that the areas of both regions match."

Can we really apply the true statistical definition of the Long Tail to "an act of kindness"?

What if the X-axis was Time and the Y-axis (vertical) was "the number of people who benefited from that one single act of kindness"? That "act of kindness" could be that one piece of work, which you and I release online (this might be interesting conversational fodder with David).

Whimsical, perhaps.

But I've come to believe that sharing my work online -- and allowing others to use -- is one of the simplest act of kindness I can do.

There's opportunity costs but it's of a very low probability. Sure, I could have been paid for my work. But I'm not likely nor willing to invest that sort of time and energy, to perfect my craft to the level of being able to make serious money on a regular basis. Such opportunity costs are low.


GENEROSITY ON A SPECTRUM
The extreme end of generosity would be to share the work as 'Public Domain'. You need not seek permission at all, nor are credits needed; absolutely no strings attached.

At the other end would be for people to pay money if they want to use my creations.

In-between, I think, are differing levels of generosity:

• Creative Commons, where the owner has already given the world permission to use the work. One need not seek explicit permission, though attribution is required. Receiving monetary payment is often not the main intent of the owner.
• 'All Rights Reserved' Copyright, where explicit permission is needed from the creator. The creator may agree to your request without any form of payment (if payment is required, it's not really sharing).

HELPING MYSELF
I've also come to realise that when I share, I hope to be entertained and learn from other people's self-expressions. I'm definitely a beneficiary, when people use my work and transform it into something that I cannot do for myself.

Sometimes, what is transformed fits exactly the vision I had.

I discovered two videos (here, and here) that seem to be part of a class assignment.

The second one is my absolute favorite, to date (thanks, LukeD):


KIB 105 Animation and Motion Graphics Assessment 3 - Luke Daly from Luke D on Vimeo.

LukeD's creative interpretation matched the sort of mental imagery I had, when I posted those words. Honestly, I would not have spent time making such a video. Nor would I have been able to produce an illustration-based work.

The best part is that my spoken poetry, that LukeD used, weren't even mine. The creator was kind enough to let me post them as a spoken piece.

The Long Tail of kindness indeed.

Source: creativecommons.org.au/content/attributingccmaterials.pdf. CC-BY. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation (www.cci.edu.au) in partnership with Creative Commons Australia(creativecommons.org.au).

Remixes, Attribution, Creative Alchemies: The Long Tail in Acts of Kindness (part 1)

Here's a few recent videos that used my songs from my ccMixter.org uploads.


Remixed with: Beyond Jupiter III


Remixed with: Dreaming of the Ocean


Remixed with: Island Journey Reprise

Typically, my songs are used in "hobbyist videos". Not surprising, as the need and demand for royalty-free works generally come from hobbyists. I think it's also the increasingly popularity of ccMixter.org as the source for CC-licensed music.

ATTRIBUTION
I love how people are crediting my music, in full, in their video descriptions. By "full", I mean describing the title, indicating my name, and including the relevant URL to link back to the source.

This wasn't necessarily the case a few years back, at least for those remixes that use my music. My impression, at least. I don't have hard evidence to prove that the level of attribution has improved. Unless I trace back all the remixes and compile the way they have been cited (... hmm).

Anyway, about two years ago, most remixes tend to unwittingly omitted the credits entirely. People email me to thank me for sharing the music, and to let me know how they have used my music. For those cases where I find that credits were not made, I ask nicely that they include my name and the relevant URL. If they have already uploaded a video, I ask that the credit is included in the description, which was easily done rather than asking them to include in the video and re-upload again.

I would add that the attribution requirement was the stated condition for using the work:

"For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of this work"

I didn't want them to think I was asking for something extra. In all cases, they happily made the change. Some went the extra step of amending their video and re-uploading it. Which was very gracious on their part.

How do I properly attribute a work offered under a Creative Commons license?
All CC licenses require users to attribute the original creator(s) of a work, unless the creator has waived that requirement or asked that her name be removed from an adaptation or collection.

CC licenses have a sophisticated and flexible attribution requirement, so there is not necessarily one correct way to provide attribution. The proper method for giving credit will depend on the medium and means you are using, and may be implemented in any reasonable manner, although in the case of an adaptation or collection the credit needs to be as prominent as credits for other contributors.

The CC website offers some best practices to help you attribute works, and the CC Australia team has developed a helpful guide to attributing works in different formats.
Source: Creative Commons FAQ

Rather than say that Creative Commons "does not provide clarity on the proper way to cite", it's more accurate to say that Creative Commons allows flexibility in how attribution can be presented. The manner of attribution depends on the medium. For instance, a "live" hyperlink is only possible for an online media, whereas for a print media the URL is obviously not "live".

It's more important that people -- users and creators -- understand the spirit and philosophy of Creative Commons. But that's not to say there cannot be clarity in how to attribute properly when making use of Creative Commons licensed materials.


HOW TO CITE EQUITABLY
I highly recommend this PDF guide to attributing works by CC Australia. It's both comprehensive and concise:

What to include when attributingAll Creative Commons (CC) licences require that users of the work attribute the creator... ...The same principles apply to providing attribution across all CC licences. You should:

• credit the creator;
• provide the title of the work;
• provide the URL where the work is hosted;
• indicate the type of licence it is available under and provide a link to the licence (so others can find out the licence terms); and
• keep intact any copyright notice associated with the work

It's not so much about "proper citation" but more of crediting the source adequately and equitably. If I'm using a CC-licensed work, I try to put myself in the other person's shoes and ask how I would want to be credited. Also, I believe that "payment" can be the form of reciprocity. Any one who uses my work, and provides equitable attribution, is my publicist.

In the digital economy, a "live" hyperlink is currency.

Admittedly, I don't always follow the last two points, i.e. indicating the CC license type and copyright notice. But I always state the creator's name and provide a "live" link back to the CC-licensed works. I try to adhere to this when listing the credits in my videos, but if it's not possible to do so fully, the "live" links are definitely in the description section.

That said, if the creator indicates very clearly how they would like to be attributed, I will always adhere to it. It helps if creators state their preferences upfront and/ or in an obvious location next to the work.

My own practice, in licensing my own work, is to state how I would like to be credited. I state this near or just below the download link. Basically in a way that others won't miss it.


I didn't always do that in the beginning. I used to assume others knew how to properly cite my work.

As creators, we can help others help us, by providing clear, simple/ hassle-free instructions and requirements. Most people will respect and adhere to that.


To be continued: Part 2.

Collaborative Creative Commons music album: “2009 Twilight Under Velveteen Skies”

I’m pleased to share this music album with the world. A collaborative effort, featuring three other very talented and very cool people I befriended at ccMixter.


The project started serendipitously. Took seven months, involving three other people whom I've never met -- and probably never will.

It includes this original 4-way collaborative track, pieced together without having met one another - Under The Velveteen Skies:


It all started when I uploaded a sample to ccMixter in Nov 08, released under a Creative Commons license.

A few weeks later, someone remixed my sample. No explicit permission needed from me, as the CC license already covered my intent. When my track was remixed and posted in ccMixter, the system automatically notified me.

I can truly say the album was built upon the foundations laid by Creative Commons.

To read more of how that one thing led to the final album, read this post.

Hope you enjoy listening to this album. I sure enjoyed the process of putting it together.

Album cover adapted from "Leo Rising Over Trees, November 2002", originally uploaded by alexpgp/ CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

Album: "2009 Twilight Under The Velveteen Skies".
By Ivan Chew and ccMixter friends:

• Mikael Hansson aka colab - www.myspace.com/colabtoronto


• teru - terumusic.blogspot.com


• narva9 - narva9.blogspot.com

2009 Twilight Under Velveteen Skies by Ivan Chew & ccMixter Friends is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Singapore License.

Download the album at www.archive.org/details/2009TwilightUnderVelveteenSkies.

Remixed (again): Twilight 2008

Nice of Mongobear to drop me an email, letting me know that he used this sample (from Twilight 2008) in his performance poetry piece.



Mongo intends to feature that piece at the IndieFeed Performance Poetry Channel podcast (in Feb 09).

He's been working on that project for over three years. They will reach their 500th show soon, and have well over two million downloads during those three years.

Wow.

You can find their feed by searching for "poetry" in iTunes. Mongo says they are usually number two or three in the podcasting section (IndieFeed Performance Poetry).

Pretty amazing poets featured. They perform their works with passion (some read aloud, some sing).

Incidentally, Mongo has worked in libraries before and says he likes to keep an eye on information management issues.

[That sample is proving to be pretty popular. Gives me a buzz to read reviews like these. I feel strongly that ccMixter is the next big thing round the corner, where music mashup is concerned.]

I've been Remixed! in this video on video on "Healthcare Support Groups in Virtual Worlds"

Nice of John to email me that he used my CCmixter samples -- Saying Goodnight and White Nights -- for his video:


John wrote that the video is part of a healthcare support room he created in Google's virtual world, "Lively" (which is soon to be defunct though, as Google is closing it down).

Anyway, thanks John, for using the samples. Glad they worked for you.

[Also posted at MyRightBrain]

I've been Remixed! by The Caffeinated Writer

[First posted at Starfish Stories]

When a stranger uses an original song of mine in his his podcast, it's a "Woot!"

When he wants to adopt it as his permanent Intro and Outro for his podcast, AND actually follows up on it -- double Woot!

I just love these lines (from his podcast #1):

We woke up from the sleepy hangover haze of the 1990s, straight into the screaming morning horror of September 11, 2001...

The city of Philadelphia felt like a sack of wet farts baked in summer time sizzle. But we bore the heat, ignored the smell and pressed on anyway. Because that was what needed to be done.

Check out The Caffeinated Writer.

Thanks for using the music, Frank.