6 ms·

Honest question, how is this legal? It looks as if there is the ability to share your music online. Can someone explain the difference between this and say Naps

Honest question, how is this legal? It looks as if there is the ability to share your music online. Can someone explain the difference between this and say Napster, Limewire, Kaza, etc? Rather than storing it locally, it’s just online... or am I missing something here?

Vinnl 6y ago
There is music you are allowed to share, e.g. music licenced under some Creative Commons licences. It's up to whoever hosts a Funkwhale instance to ensure that it only hosts legal music, I'd assume.
gitgud 6y ago
If it's decentralised, then I guess it doesn't have to be legal...
ben-schaaf 6y ago
From my understanding it's legal for the same reason Apache, nginx, curl, etc. are legal. The software can be used to violate copyright, but that doesn't make the software itself illegal.
- unnouinceput 6y ago
  Tell that to youtubedl. Embrace for stricter control from copyright groups because they don't like the tools either.
MrGilbert 6y ago
Well, as much as you can make software freely available, you can also make music and podcasts freely available. However, there is no such thing as "Github for Music". I like the decentralized approach.
JacobSuperslav 6y ago
the same way as Youtube or Bittorrent are legal
feanaro 6y ago
I don't understand your confusion. Are you under the impression that the very act of sharing music online is illegal?
- BRedSox 6y ago
  Yes, maybe that’s where my confusion sits. If I take a bunch of music and put together a playlist and post it on, say YouTube or my own site, that is perfectly fine?
  - feanaro 6y ago
    This depends on both the music in question and your jurisdiction. There is nothing inherent about "music" that makes it illegal to share it with others. Is it Taylor Swift or something your friend recorded? It makes a big difference. This is a tool to satisfy the use case of sharing music with others. Sometimes such sharing will be illegal, but at other times it won't.
    - BRedSox 6y ago
      Couldn’t the same be said for youtube-dl? Again, I don’t know.. just curious.
      - cf_ 6y ago
        Yes, the same could and has been said about YouTube-dl. It depends what you do with the tool. If you are using it to download videos that specifically allow this, then there is nothing illegal about it. It's the same thing with a hammer. You can use it for legal or illegal actions, but that doesn't make the hammer an illegal tool...
        LarvaFX 6y ago
        By watching videos or listening to videos, you make a non-digital copy of it in your mind! Is that legal? If you hum the song, is it illegal reproduction? If you describe the video to a friend, is that unauthorized reproduction? If you formulate a critique of it, is it an illegal derieved work? Who gets payed in these cases?
HugThem 6y ago
Lots of confusion in this question. Where do I even start ... First of all, what do you mean by "this"? You mention Napster and Limewire. These are things. Things cannot be illegal. Actions can be illegal. A certain action is illegal if there is a paragraph in the applicable jurisdiction that forbids it. It might be illegal to manufacture, own, fake, destroy or distribute a thing. But a thing on its own cannot be illegal. What would that even mean. So who did what, which jurisdiction is applicable and which paragraph forbids it?
- croo 6y ago
  Uhh, is youtube-dl a thing?
  - _jal 6y ago
    Yes. Much like the RIAA, you are confusing distribution with ownership.
- BRedSox 6y ago
  Let’s start with number one. By this, I mean the act of publicly posting music for others to listen to for free without paying the artist. Edit: You have since edited your comment but let’s still start there.
geoah 6y ago
Same great area that plex lives in i guess
snorremd 6y ago
As others have said. There is nothing inherently illegal about the software. As long as you are licensed to share the music you host in the instance there is nothing illegal going on. Though the RIAA might see it differently, as they have with other open-source software in the past (ref the recent DMCA takedown requests of youtube-dl GitHub repositories). They might argue the software is designed for copyright infringement and as such should be blocked.
vincnetas 6y ago
For example one of nodes : We are are a curated Funkwhale music server promoting libre audio - usually released under Creative Commons licenses and through netlabels. https://open.audio https://open.audio So this should answer your question. It's legal because it's not illegal.
- rglullis 6y ago
  Not just that. Sharing access with a friend would fall under fair-use. I've been meaning to deploy this at my home server, but then with Covid and WFH my need to have it available outside has been reduced dramatically.
  - sjy 6y ago
    Which copyright law are you talking about? My impression is that streaming a reasonably large collection of copyrighted music (say 10,000 tracks) to a reasonable number of friends (say 10) would not be considered fair use by U.S. courts. The RIAA doesn’t sue people for this because it’s hard to detect and the damages are too small to cover legal costs, not because they accept it as fair use. In the Betamax case, the Supreme Court said that it would not be fair to use copyrighted works in a way which “if it should become widespread … would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work.” Time-shifting was not considered to adversely affect the market for commercial TV. But surely a tool like Funkwhale, “if it should become widespread,” would adversely affect the music streaming industry?
    - rglullis 6y ago
      How is this different from the case of a dude with a big CD collection and a copier who tell his friends "bring blank cds and burn copies if you want anything"? Who would they sue, how would they monitor the usage and how would they enforce anything? With torrents and big sites it's easy to show who is distributing what and the distribution can be done by anyone. This is a decentralized tool that can have its access controlled. The only you could get sued is if you have a really shitty friend who goes to court and brings evidence showing you distributed too many songs.
3131s 6y ago
Have you ever seen an <audio> element on a web page? That also has the ability to share your music online.

Vinnl 6y ago

There is music you are allowed to share, e.g. music licenced under some Creative Commons licences. It's up to whoever hosts a Funkwhale instance to ensure that it only hosts legal music, I'd assume.

gitgud 6y ago

If it's decentralised, then I guess it doesn't have to be legal...

ben-schaaf 6y ago

From my understanding it's legal for the same reason Apache, nginx, curl, etc. are legal. The software can be used to violate copyright, but that doesn't make the software itself illegal.

unnouinceput 6y ago
Tell that to youtubedl. Embrace for stricter control from copyright groups because they don't like the tools either.

MrGilbert 6y ago

Well, as much as you can make software freely available, you can also make music and podcasts freely available. However, there is no such thing as "Github for Music". I like the decentralized approach.

JacobSuperslav 6y ago

the same way as Youtube or Bittorrent are legal

feanaro 6y ago

I don't understand your confusion. Are you under the impression that the very act of sharing music online is illegal?

BRedSox 6y ago
Yes, maybe that’s where my confusion sits. If I take a bunch of music and put together a playlist and post it on, say YouTube or my own site, that is perfectly fine?
- feanaro 6y ago
  This depends on both the music in question and your jurisdiction. There is nothing inherent about "music" that makes it illegal to share it with others. Is it Taylor Swift or something your friend recorded? It makes a big difference. This is a tool to satisfy the use case of sharing music with others. Sometimes such sharing will be illegal, but at other times it won't.
  - BRedSox 6y ago
    Couldn’t the same be said for youtube-dl? Again, I don’t know.. just curious.
    - cf_ 6y ago
      Yes, the same could and has been said about YouTube-dl. It depends what you do with the tool. If you are using it to download videos that specifically allow this, then there is nothing illegal about it. It's the same thing with a hammer. You can use it for legal or illegal actions, but that doesn't make the hammer an illegal tool...
      - LarvaFX 6y ago
        By watching videos or listening to videos, you make a non-digital copy of it in your mind! Is that legal? If you hum the song, is it illegal reproduction? If you describe the video to a friend, is that unauthorized reproduction? If you formulate a critique of it, is it an illegal derieved work? Who gets payed in these cases?

HugThem 6y ago

Lots of confusion in this question. Where do I even start ... First of all, what do you mean by "this"? You mention Napster and Limewire. These are things. Things cannot be illegal. Actions can be illegal. A certain action is illegal if there is a paragraph in the applicable jurisdiction that forbids it. It might be illegal to manufacture, own, fake, destroy or distribute a thing. But a thing on its own cannot be illegal. What would that even mean. So who did what, which jurisdiction is applicable and which paragraph forbids it?

croo 6y ago
Uhh, is youtube-dl a thing?
- _jal 6y ago
  Yes. Much like the RIAA, you are confusing distribution with ownership.
BRedSox 6y ago
Let’s start with number one. By this, I mean the act of publicly posting music for others to listen to for free without paying the artist. Edit: You have since edited your comment but let’s still start there.

geoah 6y ago

Same great area that plex lives in i guess

snorremd 6y ago

As others have said. There is nothing inherently illegal about the software. As long as you are licensed to share the music you host in the instance there is nothing illegal going on. Though the RIAA might see it differently, as they have with other open-source software in the past (ref the recent DMCA takedown requests of youtube-dl GitHub repositories). They might argue the software is designed for copyright infringement and as such should be blocked.

vincnetas 6y ago

For example one of nodes : We are are a curated Funkwhale music server promoting libre audio - usually released under Creative Commons licenses and through netlabels. https://open.audio https://open.audio So this should answer your question. It's legal because it's not illegal.

rglullis 6y ago
Not just that. Sharing access with a friend would fall under fair-use. I've been meaning to deploy this at my home server, but then with Covid and WFH my need to have it available outside has been reduced dramatically.
- sjy 6y ago
  Which copyright law are you talking about? My impression is that streaming a reasonably large collection of copyrighted music (say 10,000 tracks) to a reasonable number of friends (say 10) would not be considered fair use by U.S. courts. The RIAA doesn’t sue people for this because it’s hard to detect and the damages are too small to cover legal costs, not because they accept it as fair use. In the Betamax case, the Supreme Court said that it would not be fair to use copyrighted works in a way which “if it should become widespread … would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work.” Time-shifting was not considered to adversely affect the market for commercial TV. But surely a tool like Funkwhale, “if it should become widespread,” would adversely affect the music streaming industry?
  - rglullis 6y ago
    How is this different from the case of a dude with a big CD collection and a copier who tell his friends "bring blank cds and burn copies if you want anything"? Who would they sue, how would they monitor the usage and how would they enforce anything? With torrents and big sites it's easy to show who is distributing what and the distribution can be done by anyone. This is a decentralized tool that can have its access controlled. The only you could get sued is if you have a really shitty friend who goes to court and brings evidence showing you distributed too many songs.

3131s 6y ago

Have you ever seen an <audio> element on a web page? That also has the ability to share your music online.