Talk:Musopen
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Musopen is dead? edit
For 48 hours now all Musopen web pages produce 403 errors. Can anyone confirm what happened to it? Is it officially shutting down? This article will need to be updated to reflect that if it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.10.37 (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
- Seems to be normal enough now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.9.186 (talk) 22:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- Was broken for me too, asked on the kickstarter comments page, and he's responded there. Edited the page to link.129.97.120.208 (talk) 21:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
It's gone again. Now musopen.com links to a page saying that URL would be up for sale. 84.190.186.234 (talk) 19:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Press links edit
Transferred from article page--not really appropriate as external links, but may be useful if someone wants to expand the article later:
- Musopen puts classical recordings, scores in public domain, 22 May 2008, Nate Anderson, Ars Technica
- EFF
- Wired UK
- OsStatic
- UAI (in Portuguese)
- La Nación Newspaper (in Spanish)
- BoingBoing
- Lifehacker
- PC World Germany
- Slashdot
Similar projects edit
- 2013-11-08 - Open Well-Tempered Clavier - Ba©h to Bach by Robert Douglass - $10,572 pledged of $30,000 goal - 309 backers - 48 days to go
Is this legal? edit
Does the TOS trump the public domain status of the works hosted on the site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.21.127.78 (talk) 15:37, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- I do not understand. Can you ask again in a different way? Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- To ask a similar question, what prevents somebody from downloading musopen's entire catalog, and putting it up on another site? It will not violate any copyrights, since there are none (they claim the content is public domain). It seems to me that musopen do not actually want to enforce any TOS - they just want to keep their operating costs down; If someone else opens a musopen clone and pays for its hosting, I doubt musopen will mind.46.121.71.138 (talk) 11:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Check the terms of service and the copyrights asserted in different places on the site. Much of it is Creative Commons licensed, not public domain, so copyrights remain.
- If you see files there which are compatible with Wikipedia, then you might consider sharing a few in this article as examples of their offerings.
- If you wish to learn more about copyright and free licenses then you might start by reviewing Wikipedia:Copyrights. Probably some of this website's offerings are free enough to mirror in one's own website - much of it has restrictions which make it non-free by Wikipedia standards and that content cannot be hosted here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- To ask a similar question, what prevents somebody from downloading musopen's entire catalog, and putting it up on another site? It will not violate any copyrights, since there are none (they claim the content is public domain). It seems to me that musopen do not actually want to enforce any TOS - they just want to keep their operating costs down; If someone else opens a musopen clone and pays for its hosting, I doubt musopen will mind.46.121.71.138 (talk) 11:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Public domain? edit
Both the website and Wikipedia state that this website provides music released into the Public Domain. Indeed the TOS insist on it. Yet each track clearly shows the licence next to it: and I'm yet to see one in the Public Domain. 2A02:C7F:4C3B:3F00:A4B3:AA91:DF04:F882 (talk) 18:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)