pyrmont
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
The site states that you own your content[1] but then on its manifesto page[2] states that all information is in the public domain. The license itself[3] is not particularly clear.
Putting information into the public domain does provide for maximum freedom in terms of how the information can be used, but that's because the copyright owner renounces their rights.
[1]: https://frizbee.co/#WhatMakesFrizbeeDifferent558b273db212a
3. Intellectual Property Ownership
The Software and any authorized copies that Customer makes are the intellectual property of and are owned by Adobe Systems Incorporated and its suppliers. The structure, organization, and source code of the Software are the valuable trade secrets and confidential information of Adobe Systems Incorporated and its suppliers. The Software is protected by law, including but not limited to the copyright laws of the United States and other countries, and by international treaty provisions. Except as expressly stated herein, this agreement does not grant Customer any intellectual property rights in the Software. All rights not expressly granted are reserved by Adobe and its suppliers.
The rights being referred to are rights that Adobe (and its suppliers) have in the software. Courts long ago decided that, absent specific wording to the contrary, implicit rights and obligations can be read into contracts. This type of specific wording tries to avoid that from happening.
I haven't read the rest of the document so I can't speak as to whether the EULA does indeed transfer/license your rights to Adobe, but if there is such a provision, this is not it.
In one sense you could compare Spotify to radio and say that it's no different to that. But it is different. On radio, I can't select any song I want to listen to. On radio, I have to listen to what's on a playlist someone else has created (often in a manner that avoids repeating a particular song). Radio doesn't replace the needs to buy a song in order to listen to it repeatedly. Spotify does. And if it's going to do that, I think it behooves them to pay more to artists (or to place some kind of restriction on the number of times a song can be played).
This tweet is from about 2 weeks ago. Can we now say it doesn't help artists?