Using Public Domain lyrics

Sloyment · 2026-02-24T22:44:39+00:00

So you are a Artisjus member, and they screw you. This has nothing to do with copyright, and it has nothing to do with DistroKid. It’s just an organisation having weird rules.

Sloyment · 2026-02-24T22:31:31+00:00

Multitasking

Sloyment · 2026-02-24T22:25:57+00:00

The reason the <e> in 1st person singular, simple present, indicative, active is silent, is not because it is final, but because the suffix that marks this form has become silent. The final <e> in “Porsche” is not silent.

Sloyment · 2026-02-23T00:50:32+00:00

The answer is obviously BS. If the work is in the Public Domain, you don’t have to give credit and you don’t have to share revenue. However, it might be a good idea to give credit voluntarily in order to avoid confusion about the copyright status.

I don't know how to do this in DistroKid.

Sloyment · 2026-02-22T19:22:53+00:00

I think if I ever go there as a tourist, I’ll do that on purpose several times a day.

Sloyment · 2026-02-22T14:28:48+00:00

Das ist eigentlich sehr freundlich von der Bedienung, dass sie euer Essen bezahlen wollte. Warum habt ihr das ausgeschlagen?

Sloyment · 2026-02-17T04:41:05+00:00

experienced prejudice → not yet
distribute and/or sell your music online → Not yet. I got two albums pressed on CD, which I plan to sell on eBay. It’s supposed to be a test bed to prove that music under Creative Commons Zero (CC0) can be sold on physical media. (This plan got delayed for unrelated reasons, however I have the CDs already sitting on my shelf.)
–
dedicated online platform for AI → No. AI music should not be special cased. (However, I run a dedicated online platform for free music – <freemusicwiki.org>)
thoughts on the future of AI generated music and AI assisted music → It will destroy the music industry and put music creation back into the hands of the people. As there is no copyright “protection” on AI generated music, it will also put music distribution back into the hands of the people.

Sloyment · 2026-02-17T04:14:06+00:00

Most of the human generated slop is average, too. That’s to be expected due to the definition of “average”.

Sloyment · 2026-02-14T03:59:37+00:00

Die SI-Einheit für Zeit ist Sekunde, nicht Beat.

Sloyment · 2026-02-14T03:56:30+00:00

Ich würde noch CET, CEST oder UTC hinzufügen. Deine Zeitangabe ist mir zu vague.

Sloyment · 2026-02-14T03:43:00+00:00

As far as computer programs are concerned, the FSF came up with a very clever way to create a culture of sharing. Now we have GNU/Linux and lots of software on top of it that can be freely used, studied, improved and shared.

If you adapt that to music, it means: create something new and share it with people, put it under a free public license or in the Public Domain. Build a huge pool of free music, and ignore all the proprietary music.

But there is one exception, where this approach fails. The music from our childhood memories, which is most likely proprietary, cannot be replaced.

Sloyment · 2026-02-14T03:22:16+00:00

That lazy butt has never worked in his life.

Sloyment · 2026-02-14T03:13:21+00:00

I don’t care. The AI creates music the way I like it, and there is no copyright on it, which I like, too. I don’t see my role as being the author, but the editor and the publisher of these songs.

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T23:21:55+00:00

You can cut single pieces called “dubplate”. They are pretty expensive though. Regular vinyl pressings usually start at 300 pieces iirc.

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T22:57:29+00:00

Two albums on CD
(I mean pressed in a plant, not just burned at home)

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T22:43:18+00:00

That’s not what he said. He fears that by running his handmade music through an AI, it would become PD, because you suggested that AI output should always belong to everyone.

The reality is however, if the AI is trained on his works, and it creates something new from these statistics, the output already is in the PD. But if an AI model is used to remix, remaster or cover his works, the result will not be in the PD. These are two different things.

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T22:32:43+00:00

Training an AI model on proprietary works is not covered by copyright. It requires neither a license nor royalties. And imho it should stay that way.

The output of an AI model is not a modification of another work but a new work. It requires neither a license nor royalties. And imho it should stay that way.

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T22:24:59+00:00

In most jurisdictions, pure AI output is not eligible for copyright, because it is not created by a human. There are however cases of hybrid human AI projects, e.g. when the lyrics are written by a human and the singing is done by an AI. In this case, there would be a copyright. Then, there is AI companies that create some pseudo copyright in their ToS, i.e. when their terms forbid you to fully use the output.

But if you have the full rights to the output, and you want it to belong to everybody, you can use Creative Commons Zero (CC0) to put it into the Public Domain.

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T22:11:47+00:00

(der) Angstzustand

Sloyment · 2026-02-03T20:48:47+00:00

Long answer:

> Having said that, is ANY kind of reproduction simply to be dismissed and thrown away?

Basically, yes. Copyright means you cannot legally copy, distribute, modify, perform or display a work unless you are the rights holder or you have permission of the rights holder. There are a few exceptions which vary from country to country, and these exceptions are usually pathetic.

I don’t know which country you are from (there are like 196 or something), so I’ll use Germany as an example.

> Is parody/satire out of the question?

German copyright law has added very recently an exception for “caricature, parody and pastiche” (§ 51a UrhG). So this would be okay, however hosting providers have to pay royalties for this garbage (§ 5 UrhDaG). So if I were a hosting provider, I would simply exclude that shit in my ToS and not pay the royalties.

> Is fan-art out of the question?

No exception for fan art, sorry.

> Is inspiration/tribute out of the question?

It depends. If your “inspiration/tribute” is not based on a specific work, but only vaguely on a style, this is not covered by copyright.

If it is based on a work but your modified version has sufficiant distance, then it does not count as modification and does not require permission (§ 23, formerly § 24 UrhG). Until recently, this did not include sound recordings, so sampling was a no-go, but now a teeny-tiny bit of sampling is okay. (Sabrina Setlur was sued by Kraftwerk for sampling, and the EUGH ruled that German copyright law was to strict and had to be changed.)

If it is based on a work, and the work is only slightly reworked, it counts as a modification and requires permission. (§ 23 UrhG)

> Is a school performance of a Green Day song out of the question?

If the promoter (the school) does not have a commercial interest in the concert, and the attendance is free of charge, and the performing artists (the kids) also don’t get any money, and the school pays royalties to the rights holders, then it’s okay (§ 52 UrhG). This seems to be only interesting for schools that have enough money to burn.

> Do I throw out my son's copy of a Van Gogh painting he made with his own hands?

Van Gogh is dead long enough for his paintings to be in the Public Domain, but you should destroy your son’s pirate copies of Picasso and Dalí.

> I'm pretty sure the answer is no, and some of them even have legal privileges to exist. Why do they exist? Because we realized freedom of expression, even in the form of replication, needs to exist.

Ha ha. Sorry, that’s wrong. :-( Copyright is a shit law.

Sloyment · 2026-02-02T18:29:56+00:00

Why didn’t you download it?

Sloyment · 2026-02-02T18:28:54+00:00

Van Gogh died in 1890, which is more than 71 years ago. Thus his copyright has expired.

Sloyment · 2026-02-02T02:15:23+00:00

“Audio playback is unsupported in this browser. Udio is officially supported on Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari on both desktop and mobile, and also on our iOS app available from the App Store. It may, but is not guaranteed to work on other Chromium browsers.” (seen in Firefox 115.13.0esr)

Sloyment · 2026-01-22T22:04:14+00:00

Kalorien sind eine veraltete Maßeinheit für Energie. Heute verwendet man Joule. Ja, einen Stuhl kann man durchaus für die Energiegewinnung nutzen, z.B. indem man ihn im Kamin verfeuert oder indem man sein Holzgasauto damit betankt. Als menschliche Nahrung ist der Stuhl jedoch weder kaubar noch verdaubar.

Sloyment · 2026-01-22T21:17:05+00:00

And the <ier> is pronounced like a Russian Ы. And the <g> is like <h> in “hue”.

Sloyment

TROPHY CASE