Let people first and foremost provide music for free (and get compensated in DVC), so other people can use that music for free in their projects.
It seems MarkM's point is being, largely, missed.
If we are talking about free music then the authors of said music can simply release it to the public domain. That is not the same as
Open Source.
How is this poem at devtome open source?
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=epic_love_poemPlease explain this. Is such a poem open source, because I can go ahead and change words etc?
Don't I destroy the work of this poet if I just switch words around as it pleases me?
I mean, if I am really good, I can make this poem better, and add value. If I am illiterate I will destroy this poem if I try to change and remix it.
I can create "poems" thru music, and post them so people can listen to them. I can also give people access to the MIDI-Files and all the tracks (if for example my music has 8 tracks, people can download all tracks separately)... So people can remix and mashup my music and potentially (if they know what they are doing) create something new.
The poem on devtome is free too, won't you agree?
I think we can all agree that everything that is posted as open source is also always free.
But not everything that is free is open source. But artists can make their art more or less open source by giving access to all work material. But this is difficult if part of their work material is
in their brain.
For example: I can't open source the groove feeling I have in my left hand when I play that funky bassline.
Oh I can give you notes and MIDI-Files... but try and use those to create similar funky basslines and
you will fail.What I mean is, open source is partly possible with art, but not all the way thru, like it is with math and code.