7 ms·
Mobygratis – Free Moby music to empower your creative projects
- rkagerer 2y agoAll I wanted to do was play a sample of one randomly selected track. Clicking the play button doesn't do that, it brings up a somewhat eccentric 2-line license agreement. Clicking the checkmark to agree then prompts for your email address and to create an account. These are dark UI patterns, and it's a shame a website purporting to be about generously sharing free content uses them. A button should do what it advertises. Here's a snippet from the full license text if anyone's curious: Moby does not permit his Tracks to be used to advertise right-wing politics or causes, or to be used to promote meat, dairy, or other animal products. People may disagree about when these lines have been crossed—which is why Moby retains the right to terminate the license to any Track completely at his sole and absolute discretion, at any time. Also note you're contracting with a corporation, and the agreement includes a clause about you indemnifying them.
- nialse 2y agoJust a quick note: pressing the ‘Browse Anonymously’ button located just above the email field will allow you to do exactly that.
- rkagerer 2y agoThanks, I missed that extra step.
- HowTheStoryEnds 2y agoYeah it's the Stalinistic version of freedom.
- autobodie 2y agoMore like the libertarian version of freedom, but not much more.
- 00deadbeef 2y agoI found it simple enough. There’s a “browse anonymously” button after the eccentric terms.
- graemep 2y agoNot just eccentric, it is vague and arbitrary. "Right wing" is very vague, and "animal products" is not much better. That snippet implicitly acknowledges this and Moby the person gets to arbitrate between you and Moby Collaboration, Inc. Also this: "Mobygratis retains the right in its sole and absolute discretion to determine whether any use of a Track (or Collaboration or Master Recording derived therefrom) is commercial."
- perrygeo 2y ago> somewhat eccentric 2-line license agreement That's an understatement. Restricting content based on political activism I can sympathize, if not agree with. Restriction based on war and geopolitics, ok. But based on promoting veganism? Come on dude, pick your battles. Any business that deals in any way with animal products (virtually every restaurant, grocery store, hospital, school, entertainment venue, etc) could get accused of promoting cruelty and violating the license; this is a nonstarter.
- glimshe 2y agoI wish they could have used standard creative commons licenses. It took me some time to find that the tracks can't be used commercially without per-track licensing conversations.
- nialse 2y agoThe licensing is "interesting". Using a standard and well understood license would be helpful. Reading the license Moby Collaboration, Inc. reserves the unchecked, unilateral right to revoke the permission “at any time for any reason or no reason.” - this is unlikely to hold up in court and is a signal for anyone to not touch the content with a ten-foot pole. It makes me think that Moby forgot to check the license with a lawyer, and maybe with reality, first.
- ZeroTalent 2y agoGiven his track record, I doubt he will pursue irrational lawsuits.
- jagged-chisel 2y agoAnd whose definition of “irrational” will he be using?
- antfarm 2y agoCool idea of a great artist to stay relevant in the era of AI generated muzak!
- imaginationra 2y agoIt's not tho, Moby. And this "music" is human generated muzak.
- anotherlab 2y agoMoby licensed every song from "Play" for commercial use. The exposure made "Play" a huge hit for him. This is just a variation of that. This is an attempt to grab a slice of the pie before AI-generated music kills the market for session musicians. His terms of use are odd, but that's his choice.
- joenot443 2y agoWith all the charity work Moby does, I get the impression he's pretty comfortable cash-wise. Personally, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying that his intentions are earnest here; he really does want to put free music in the hands of creators. Maybe if he'd launched a $MOBY memecoin alongside it I'd be skeptical, but my gut says this isn't a venture he expects to make real money from.
- queenkjuul 2y agoI guess that's why I'm even more disappointed in the complicated commercial licensing. If you don't need the money, just let people use it no strings attached (or, with just the political strings attached--more okay with that than the money, honestly)
- textadventure 2y agoMoby launched this site TWENTY YEARS AGO, before YouTube even existed.
- joeevans1000 2y agoReally interesting to think about what would constitute commercial use in this day and age. If someone makes the track and puts it on YouTube and there happens to be ads… apparently 51% has to go to Moby. it is cool that anyone could just download and go. But I wonder if a lot of bedroom producers are just going to accept the terms without actually reading them, and not realize, based on the introductory video, that they have to do a profit share if they monetize in anyway. I do think he should've mentioned the profit share in his video.
- androng 2y agoCommercial Use License If you wish to use a track from the mobygratis platform for commercial purposes, you must apply for a commercial license prior to such use. You may do so by sending an email to: mobygratis@moby.com and include your full name, the name of the Track, and your desired use of the Track, including all the commercial uses you anticipate, and the desired duration of the commercial license. If one or more artists create an initial Collaboration and they are granted a commercial license, their revenue share would be, in the sole discretion of mobygratis, at most, 49% (forty-nine percent) of the gross income earned, received or credited from the permitted use and exploitation of that Collaboration. If a Collaboration is subsequently used by another artist or artists to create a new (or sub-) Collaboration—the new collaborating artist(s) will receive their share of any revenue exclusively from the initial collaborator(s); the mobygratis revenue share of any collaboration, regardless of how many layers of collaboration have occurred, shall always be greater than 50% (fifty percent). However, the specifics are subject to change in the sole and absolute discretion of mobygratis and would be covered on a case-by-case in the commercial license.
- gus_massa 2y agoJust to clarify, your comment is a quote of https://mobygratis.com/license-agreement#:~:text=Commercial%20Use%20License https://mobygratis.com/license-agreement#:~:text=Commercial%... If you add > * text * it's more clear what is happening: > Commercial Use License If you wish to use a track from the mobygratis platform for commercial purposes, you must apply for a commercial license prior to such use. You may do so by sending an email to: mobygratis@moby.com and include your full name, the name of the Track, and your desired use of the Track, including all the commercial uses you anticipate, and the desired duration of the commercial license. > If one or more artists create an initial Collaboration and they are granted a commercial license, their revenue share would be, in the sole discretion of mobygratis, at most, 49% (forty-nine percent) of the gross income earned, received or credited from the permitted use and exploitation of that Collaboration. If a Collaboration is subsequently used by another artist or artists to create a new (or sub-) Collaboration—the new collaborating artist(s) will receive their share of any revenue exclusively from the initial collaborator(s); the mobygratis revenue share of any collaboration, regardless of how many layers of collaboration have occurred, shall always be greater than 50% (fifty percent). However, the specifics are subject to change in the sole and absolute discretion of mobygratis and would be covered on a case-by-case in the commercial license.
- self_awareness 2y agoToo much politics involved for my taste. It seems that I can't use it to promote Slavic content, because Slavic as a tradition can be right-wing in Moby's world. If you're a content creator, I don't think going into this rabbit hole is worth it.
- queenkjuul 2y agoPlenty of proud left wing Slavs for you to choose to promote
- self_awareness 2y agoI'm not sure Moby would agree.
- queenkjuul 2y agoWhat reason do you have for thinking Moby would find all Slavic content right wing, even if it featured left wing figures?
- 999900000999 2y ago>there are only 2 things you can't do with the music here; use it to advertise right wing politics or causes, or use it to promote meat, dairy, or other animal products. click here to view the full terms. I'm very liberal, but this is bizarre. Apart of a society is doing business with people who don't 100% agree with you. And Bob's Burritos can't run an ad with it because they aren't a vegan restaurant ? I'm lumped in with the Republicans because I like burgers and pizza? Is that where the culture war is at?
- protimewaster 2y agoIt's been a pretty common practice for years that musicians will refuse their music being used to promote things they disagree with. E.g., some politician will use a track by a band, the band doesn't like the politician, so they'll tell the politician to stop using the track. And, I don't think that the agreement here is meant to equate eating meat with being right wing. Moby is famously against animal products, so he's decided he doesn't want the music used to support those products.
- pcthrowaway 2y ago> Apart of a society is doing business with people who don't 100% agree with you. There's a vast chasm between "not 100%" agreeing with someone (Moby in this case), and being a Nazi. Bob's Burritos is a TV show so I don't think they'd be considered promoting meat, though the legalese is probably too questionable, as is restricting use for "right wing politics". Moby is however of the opinion that animal abuse is unacceptable, regardless of whether people think it tastes good. I'm generally of the opinion that people should be free to establish hard boundaries for the use of their content.
- 999900000999 2y agoYou're thinking of Bob's Burgers, but even then it's a cartoon where the characters eat meat. If you take this to its logical conclusion it can't be used with any media that displays the consumption of food that's not 100% vegan. Right wing cause is also a bucket of worms. Someone like Joe Rogan is now considered Right Wing though he supported Bernie Sanders in the past. If a liberal podcast host uses this as their theme music, then has a right wing guest on violate this? If I mention I start my day with some yogurt, did I violate it ? Feels like a "I'll sue you if I want" clause.
- imaginationra 2y agoIs this a joke? No one is going to use this. This "music" was content slop ai music before content slop ai music- so people will just use real content slop ai music.
- hackyhacky 2y ago"The music these days, it's just noise. Why can't kids listen to real music, like we used to have?" -- literally every generation
- VariousPrograms 2y agoThe intro video makes it sound multiple times like he wants creatives to use the music with absolutely no strings or restrictions, but the most basic uses like a Youtube video or indie film would require manually applying for a license where half the revenue goes to Mobygratis let alone the restrictions based on Moby’s political and dietary preferences. He’s certainly free to license his music however he wants but he’s really overselling how permissive it is.
- sheepscreek 2y agoI’m not sure about the rev share aspect, but I’m a bit disappointed that, despite his message of “go ahead and do your thing, worry about edge cases later” (paraphrasing), the legalese further introduces the concept of commercial and non-commercial nature of different tracks. I genuinely hoped for a MIT/BSD-like license that would allow people to express themselves freely with his content. However, I am now less inclined to do so. Update: All said, still grateful to him for doing something. That’s already way more than most artists to do give back.
- throwawayqqq11 2y agoThe articulated restrictions could be defined as a creative commons license too. With cc-by-nc-nd (attribition-noncommercial-noderivative), people would be free to use the songs for any non-commercial purpose and would have to aquire a license for everything beyond. The fact that moby is rolling out (and enforcing?) his own thing makes it untrustworthy.
- stuaxo 2y agoIt's very possible he doesn't know about cc-by-nc-ld not everyone hangs out on techie websites and consumes open source.
- queenkjuul 2y agoBut you'd think whoever he hired that understands media licensing would. Cc-BY is pretty common in stock footage licensing for example
- autobodie 2y ago> "Moby does not permit his Tracks to be used to advertise right-wing politics or causes, or to be used to promote meat, dairy, or other animal products. People may disagree about when these lines have been crossed—which is why Moby retains the right to terminate the license to any Track completely at his sole and absolute discretion, at any time."
- janalsncm 2y agoIt’s all relative. Last week I found out that building housing was considered a right wing idea. Apparently supply side progressivism is right wing in some circles.
- ZeroTalent 2y agoContext matters: what housing?
- janalsncm 2y agoThe idea to increase supply to push costs down so that regular people like teachers and waiters and nurses can afford to live in the city. Of course this will induce demand as well, so it’s nonlinear. But the point is, it’s not a right wing idea.
- autobodie 2y agoSince the French Revolution, "right wing" by and large means a politics that defends or expands the established ruling order. In so far as the established ruling order is so-called free market capitalism, as is the case in the US, I have to agree that your political interests are right-wing aligned. That said, Americans have somehow redefined and reduced all political vocabulary to absolute nonsense, so I can see why you wouldn't understand this.
- lovegrenoble 2y agoCrazy and over-complicated license, better have a look at it: https://freemusicarchive.org/home https://freemusicarchive.org/home
- ano-ther 2y agoI don't care that the license is non-commercial. The collection is great. It's like a much more polished and professional version of my ideas folder (I rarely get beyond the initial loop/riff stage). Will now download a random piece, pop it into my DAW and see if it can inspire me to create something new.
- textadventure 2y agoI think like 99% of people in comments are missing the fact that Moby first launched this project 20 years ago when not even Youtube was a thing.
- croisillon 2y agoi don't understand how i can accept the license, i disabled uBlock origin and still see no solution
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y agoAs a non-right winger vegan who likes to play around with a sampler and only sometimes show my music to my friends and family, this is perfect
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y agoSounds like he's interested in people listening to the music while creating. Maybe also using it as inspiration for their own music. He's not supplying it as a stock sounds library. Eh. Some of his music I like, some, not so much. I'll give it a listen. I don't listen to music while I code. The only time I listen to music, is my daily exercise in the morning. This may be good for that. Might use it as background music for some presentations. I don't vlog; which seems to be where a lot of stock music is used.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- juunpp 2y agoI think for media/assets, CC-BY is the equivalent of MIT/BSD for source, and CC-BY-SA similar to a GPL. Anything more restrictive than that (e.g., "NC") wouldn't really qualify as "free". The licensing in this case seems to have too many strings attached.
- ein0p 2y agoHmm, generating royalty-free music on Suno, or getting involved with some pompous dude who strokes out at the sight of someone eating a burger and demands 51% for his "no strings attached" stuff that's 20 years old? Tough choice.