#musicbrainz

BrianFreud: Why are you abstaining on the Aiofe -> Aoife merge? o.O

That's about as straight forward a merge as any merge has e'er been.

catgroove: I know. I'm just curious as to why one would abstain on it. The edit seems so perfectly clear to me.

I can understand abstaining on removing Rory Campbell's composition AR, as that is a wee bit foggy. But. Oh well.

doop doop

It has three votes now anyway, so it will be cleared off by next ModBotRun.

\o/

catgroove is now known as okonomiyaki

Have a good one, then. :)

Where's the MoosicBrainz logo again?

Freso: Sorry, was in the midst of a few IMs, just wanted a sec to read em :P

BrianFreud: No reason to be sorry, it just got me puzzled a bit.

lol

Moose :D

Ne'ermind, found it: http://age.hobba.nl/temp/MoosicBrainz_3.jpg

I wish it would default to that...

so do I

Oh well, off I go.

hey all, just wrote a new greasemonkey script: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/9169

I might bbl.

looks like that script would address the vague "is a cover of" AR screen issue I'd written up in bugtracker

yeah

note that it only does it on the "create relationship" page, not on release pages

i was afraid the latter would cause to much of a strain on the server

as long as it does it on the screen with the submit button, I'm happy :)

:)

Freso: I'm tending towards Rory... Look here : http://www.rambles.net/tickell02_live.html

they ID Rory as the Cambell mentioned up top, and the 2nd to last paragraph ID'd Heidi as being a tune by "Cambell", referring to the same Campbell mentioned earlier

i think freso left

ah, I'll leave it in notes then :)

whoa, what?

he had a AR edit he hasn't sure on

you can use "The Wayback Machine" at archive.org for cover art?

it works

didn't ruaok say it was "cheating" though?

he did, but I think he meant en regards it being easy. Still go for the normal methods if you can, but WB is the only way for art for some older releases...

ok

one I know offhand - artist=Scream release=Still Screamin'

will never be listed as that release on AZN, since it

was later re-released on CD as a split dual album

by using the wayback machine, that essentially allows us to use just about any website for cover art

hey luks, how's it going?

but are we sure that archive pages at archive.org never expire?

they don't

ok

or at least, pages of mine from 1993 still haven't expired out :P

O_o

lol, i wasn't aware the webpages could be that old

lol, this was early web 1.0 stuff I had up on a college server, some of my old notes from working on the original mp3 standard even :P

back when fraunhoffer kept threatening lawsuits for anyone using mp3 tech :P

luks: Do you happen to know if genpuid still works? Any file I try it on gets "invalid" returned

Has anyone thought about redesigning http://musicbrainz.org/browsevarious.html ?

The current system gives waay to much whitespace, im

s/im/imo

what, make it more like the advanced edit search maybe?

What's the advanced edit search?

I was thinking more like beatports browser

Not seen that page before :)

speaking of early mp3's...here's some trivia: What was the first mp3?

outside of fraunhoffer, you mean?

nope...mp3 was designed through one particular track

drsaunde: or the one's my old boyfriend made forr me from 12" vinyl singles for my 30th b-day?

no clue... just remember having to dig through lots of mp2's for the mp3s, and seeing tons of spice girls mp3s around back then

the answer is here (presented in MB link form for those who still want to guess): http://musicbrainz.org/album/284bbee1-45cc-425d...

oh, you're right... forgot about that :)

the change in pitch of all the "do's" was determined to be the perfect test of the format

you know, the funny part is, the research group I was working with at JHU back then, w/regard to mp3s, we wanted to try and use the tech for a cheap internet phone system. Finally gave up, cause even with 100 base T ethernet, the computers didn't have enough CPU to both play and encode an mp3 at the same time

BrianFreud: i was working a research project also, we were testing MP# for archival audio, as tapes were beginning to degrade -- even in a library setting

see, seems like that would have been more possible than what were were trying.

Just makes me laugh, since today a cheap vonage box can do what we couldn't do with the best comps at the time :P

yeah, we needed a *really quick* fix.

hi ruaok

I just got back from the bowels of the DMV.

hi!

thus the advantage of having a boyfriend that was a professional DJ, he had all the latest gear for mixing / re-mixing, adjust degraded audio

but now my car will have license plates again that match my nick. :-)

i wonder how many MB'ers are California Highway Patrol?

:-)

not sure.

but when I was in iceland last year I wanted to hide and not talk about MB.

on my last day I took a glacier hike.

and our guide really wanted to chat, even though we were engrossed in nature.

i was just wondering if the new vanity plate would ever get you out of a ticket

he asks what I do, so I tell him.

he responds: Oh MusicBrainz! Yes, I've cleaned up my music collection with that. Thanks!

lol

lol..nice

been to hell i spell it.. spell it D M V

its not new. I've had the plate since 89

its one of the cool blue ones

ruaok: so is using the wayback machine on archive.org for cover art allowed or no?

no

oh

why's that?

even thought he wayback machine managed to somehow escape massive copyright suits, their doings are *technically* illegal.

but morally quite upstanding.

ok so it's a copyright issue

ok

its never been anything else. :-(

Jugdish: gaining rights for album art, esp for vintage albums can ge a nightmare. that's why many re-releases have "new album art"

I apologize for being inflexible on this, but copyright violations are a serious issues that MB needs to steer clear of

hey ruoak, I understand what you're saying w/regards to bootleg covers. Was wondering though, last night while I added in some discogs links - any idea how they're doing it w/o copyright issues - or is discogs just running the risks?

ruaok: in that case you may want to restrict the accepted domain range at archive.org for cover art ARs

*subdomain range

good point.

ping me on that in say... two weeks.

Guess I ought to update the coverart wiki then to not just exclude bootlegs, but any use of the WB machine

heh

as long as that sub-domain doesn't also include artist images that are designated "fair-use"

I am going to try to get some advice on this...

I wonder, is the situation the same for cover art on an artist's own page?

I would have to say yes.

BrianFreud: drop an e-maila nd ask :)

*and ask

there are lots of times where artists dont even own the copyright to the art.

thumbnails are okay for album art as "fair-use".

True... and why is it this is starting to remind me of the bootlegs discussion from the mailinglist? :P

so, unless, as yllona suggests, we don't have permission to do so, we should assume that we dont.

ruaok: did i send you that discussion on use of thumbnail images? useful starting point for discussion with a "legal professionl"

I dont think so.

let me check "sent e-mail" for you

Ruoak: Well, for those w/o art through the normal three, if I/we were to write an artist for permission to display art by linking to the art on their page, assuming we received written permission and passed that permission on to you (or posted it in the wiki or something), would you consider that to be legally safe enough to protect MB and allow us to set up a coverart AR to that art?

yes. post it to the wiki page (or better create a new one)

ruaok: it's on the way, it's folded into a general discussion about copyright/privacy for bloggers/web sites... but useful article

or would we need to go to the publisher, or someone else?

thx, yllona

permission from *someone* is fine.

ok

it shows that we made an effort to be good citizens.

if the contrary becomes clear we take it down.

that's *reasonably* safe.

any lawyers around who might be able to draft a sample letter - we also still need one for the main coverart page

we dont need a lawer for that.

its not a legal document. we just need someone who can write decent english.