#license:CC-by-sa-3.0 <-- not sure why they haven't upgrades to 4.0. If anyone prefers to use this document under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license, you should feel free to do that as well.

0. Announcements
    Does MEF (we'll just call it that for now) need to have a meeting either via Google Hangout, a time to gather in the chat, mumble or via something like webrtc (check out https://live.mayfirst.org/?nefnegotiations if curious about the possibilities of webrtc...or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webrtc if you want text versus hands on)

    Doug is just now looking at righttomusic.org. It might be the place to start, since it is just getting started, rather than starting a new org.

There is a backup of this document at https://pad.riseup.net/p/ccmusicfuture (you should ping that document on occasion so that we don't lose it)

I. Goal: Promote the Music Commons by more high profile artists releasing under CC and to raise the profile of current CC artists.

    The Commons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_commons
        "Commons refers to the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_commons_(economics)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

I.A. Secondary Goals
    Convince musicians to release under CC.
    Get more people listening to CC (which might help convince artists to release)

II. Proposed Names:
    Musical Empowerment Federation
        This was just a name I through together based off the immediate inspiration for the group. www.netizenfed.org. For a variety of reasons, NEF isn't going to be able to get started in full force until after I pay off my law school debt, so I thought maybe it made sense to focus on a smaller objective. Aside from that, this organization has NOTHING to do with the old NEF or the structure of NEF.

    That said, this discussion has me thinking that perhaps the scope and structure of NEF should change. We've already got a website, integration into idealist.org and are on a number of social media platforms. Given the problems NEF has had, I think reformulating may be the thing to do.
    
    If anyone wants to look at the current draft of the NEF Bylaws, you can find a copy at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n9EpqxYmAjieqVRrfvT8ga8TDDexbLPhyeQFNeFmQPI/edit?usp=sharing
        
        
    Free Music Foundation
        I think if we do something like this, we'd have to promote free culture. If we design it as a membership organization, then I think the current people working with -ND and -NC would still be fine as members.
        Apparently this name already exists, but appears not to be in use: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Free-Music-Foundation/74471338157
        
    Internet Music Foundation
        The problem with this as a name is that CC exists off the Internet as well. Considering the roots of what Tom and I have always wanted to do with live music, I'm not really that fond of this as a concept. If people think this has legs though, I could be convinced.
    
    CC Music Foundation
        The immediate problem I see with this is potential trademark problems with CC. I think those should be easy enough to work out though. Also, this doesn't take into account Free Art License or PD stuff and I see no reason personally to exclude those.
        
    Music Manumit Foundation
        I'd have to talk to Tom about this one but it has SEO juice as "Manumit" is not a word oft used in modern English.
    
    Music Manumission Foundation 
        I think this is more gramatically correct, it doesn't directly conflict with Music Manumit and manumission is a slightly more familiar word to people. Also, www.musicmanumission.com is available.
      
    Free Music, Free Tech
        This obviously puts the cart before the horse on the tech side, but I suppose picking a name before the concept of the org puts the cart before the horse no matter what we decide to do (assuming, of course, we decide to do something)
        
    Free Sound Foundation
        Obviously potentially confusing with the, um, FSF. However, this has the bonus of not necessarily being about music. Or maybe that's not a bonus.
        
    Taken names:
        Open Music Foundation
        
        
III. Proposed formats:
    CC Label - I really haven't thought too much about how a label would work. I've never thought until now about starting a netlabel. I just tossed it out there to get people thinking. I don't know if any of the netlabelists in "the group" have thought about releasing physical records and trying to get them in record stores.
    Social Welfare Business - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation
        I don't know much about these.
    Cooperative - I don't really know much about cooperatives. Technically I guess cooperatives can be 501(c)(3)s. Stephen (of Cyberunions.org) mentioned one to me a while back. I'm looking into getting that information from him 
`

IV. Possible US Federal Tax Status
Eventually, I would want to be registered in Germany and the UK as well...possibly others, but see Section V.

V. Geographic Scope
    Maybe from a legal perspective it makes sense to start out US-only. We could obviously incorporate just in the US and still have participation from outside the US. That's how the FMA works.

VI. Other organizations that could potentially use our support instead of starting something new:
VII. Proposed Limitations
    CC, Free Art, PD?
    Dues? - I'm not personally fond of dues, but it may be a necessary evil.
    Free Software? - in NEF we floated around the idea of FLOM: Free/Libre Open Media, but we struggled to come up with a good definition. Music Manumit is by no means completely free software and I assume never will be, but again, an organization that promotes free software may not necessarily need to have all of its members be completely free software. I know members of the FSF that work at proprietary software development companies and use Windows at work. They have to pay the bills...and from the podcasting perspective, not all of our guests are technical. It's hard enough getting people to use Skype and Google Hangouts without having to do the mumble audio settings. That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to promote an easier SIP or an easier mumble. These aren't exactly new issues, but maybe we could bring fresh perspective to them.

VIII. People/orgs we should contact about this
    FMA
    Tryad
    Professor Kliq
    I Am Not Lefthanded
    Michael Gregoire (BlocSonic)
    Flattr
    Kickstarter
    IndieGoGo
    Nina Paley (Question Copyright)
    Bandcamp
    magnatune.com
    Soundcloud <-- Music Manumit is talking to them in October. I can mention it to them when we get closer to confirming times. This never happened...
    Mixcloud (?) <-- this is a good shout Dan. I always forget about them.

    Jono Bacon (Severed Fifth) <-- I've been told he is too busy at this point. I'll contact him in the future though.

    Jeff Rosenstock (QUR, BTMI) <-- Doug got a MySpace account just to make this happen...but can't figure out how to contact anyone on the new MySpace



IX. People/orgs already contacted about this
    Open Metalcast (Craig Maloney)
    CCHits (Jon Spriggs)
    Ryno The Bearded
    Gurdonark (Robert Nunnelly)
    Juergen (Freak Fandango Orchestra)
    C. Reider (deriv.cc, Vuhz, etc)
    Jesse von Doom (CASH Music)
    Bad Panda Records
    Headphonica (netlabel)
    Dead Unicorn/Right To Music (Zac Shaw)
    Kevie (Tuxjam, CC Jam, Unseen Studio)
    Amsterdammack (Marc)
    Sndchaser 
    Wayne Myers (Fit and the Conniptions)
    David Nemeth
    Nick Clark
    Creative Commons (Eric Steuer, Jessica says)
    Dogmazic
    David Rovics
    Future of Music Coalition
    Dan Lynch (Rathole Radio, 20 lb Sounds)
    Dave & Caroline (The Bugcast)
    Jamendo
    ccmixter (Susan)
    Mike Nutt
    Kevin MacLeod
    der kleine grüne Würfel (Marco)
    C3S
    Broken Cities    
    Orxata Sound System
    Seo from Crete Boom
    Original Machine (Nicholas Young)
    Louis Lingg and the Bombs
    Loz Kaye
    Shearer
    Rosie and Will Strong (Basic.fm...actually, I contacted Rosie and asked her to pass word to will)


X. Proposed Activities
XI. Random Thoughts
'In general I think the biggest barrier to adoption of CC licensing is the false conflation of CC which is designed to allow artists to make their own choices about distribution with "music should be free" ideology espoused by for-profit companies that would ultimately limit artists' choices.' - Kevin from Future of Music Coalition, but not speaking on behalf of FMC.

XII. Amsterdammack's thoughts's with commentary
Maybe we should start improving first. Several tools are available and not used very well!

One of my favourite tools that needs more love is cchits.net <-- I agree, but I've been unsuccessful in getting anything automatic set up thus far and I don't have time to manually upload tracks.

From a podcast perspective it seems a lot of work to get things uploaded with all the extra information like NSFW, but it is very worth doing it. To improve this part, we may could find a way of standardising show notes, so it would only need a little skript to upload the tracks with very little or no additional work. From a listeners perspective, I would love to see some improvement on the UI and I believe that adding search should not be too difficult.

Other tools are available to improve the workflow when shows are created. One that sticks out to me is the podlove project. They started to create better tools for podcasting. All it takes is to get their WP-plugin. They have achieved a lot and have some very cool features coming up in the future. Unfortunately the project is still very German, but already in use with some of the biggest podcasters in Germany. Other tools like auphonic can help to reduce the amount of time in post-production. <-- MMP uses Blogger

Things like last.fm and mixcloud are excelent ways to reach out to music lovers. It is not very difficult to upload a music show add chapters and get the music scobbled to last.fm

One way to get started would be a way of sharing resources. If for example MMP is having a guest, it would be easy to ask the guest to record two jingles. One "branded" for MMP and a second one that is neutral. This way we could create a jingle database, that others can use. For the artists it is not a big deal, because they have recording equipment and it is not very hard to upload it to soundcloud or archive.org 

Another thing that could be better is the inclusion of netlabels. Rather than tracking the twitter and RSS feeds, I would love to have some kind of service that brings the news together. We should try to get them onboard to provide the information about things that are comming up like new releases or tour dates. If we could convince them to send out pre-release material like background information on the artists/albums or other interesting things it would help a lot. <-- if you look at Section IX, you'll notice that I did contact a few netlabels about this. Feel free to send more to the page

Working together with the netlabels makes a lot of sense, because they are close to the artists and can influence them to come on shows for interviews. At the same time, I believe we need to encourage people more often to drop some money so the artists see that it makes sense to continue to release under cc-licenses...

Another idea is to have a website dedicated to the shows of participating podcasters. I would love to see a schedule with all shows and their start time preferrably a google calendar. Timeszones and changes from Summer to Winter time and the other way around bring lots of confusion. <-- I very much agree with this. I thought Unseen Studios could end up being the place for that, but neither Tom on the Music Manumit side nor Gordon on the TINT/Unseen Studios side, seemed to see value in a partnership. Of course, Unseen Studios isn't just music, so maybe that's a potential problem. www.netizenfed.org is also an option. I'd love for more people to be involved and campaigned hard for it. The only real rule is that interviews and such must be released under a free culture license. We can't much say the music must be free culture licensed since we don't do that on Music Manumit.

I have a few more ideas, but I am not really able to spit them out at the moment. Maybe we could continue the discussion on the ccmusic roundtable: https://plus.google.com/101922229601219138698/posts/AQYfN2CLdXT

XIII C. Reider's Two Cents
                                   
Here are a few thoughts & constructive critiques of the text.  I can see that this text & thoughts about the org are still evolving, hopefully these thoughts & questions will be of help in honing your ideas.

If "empowerment' is an important enough goal that you are strongly considering using it as part of the name of this CC Music empowerment org, then it's important to think about what empowerment looks like, and who needs it.  Who is dis-empowered and how does an org like this help them?  (E.g.: In netlabel culture (unsure if this is true across the global CC music spectrum) the dominant demographic is Caucasian and male, how can women and other ethnicities be supported and feel included?) <-- I've tried to get people from every continent on Music Manumit, but have hit a wall with Africa. I would really appreciate some help with this. The female issue is interesting. Perhaps Andrea or Caroline could comment on this, though there's plenty of others (Jody, Susan and Zoe all immediately spring to mind) Hi guys! I think the music industry is very male dominated already - and the CCmusic community is going to reflect that. As you guys do your planning around these issues, just keep in mind consulting diverse experts -- guest bloggers, guests on your show -- programming for an org can be done in a way to promote oppertunities. Just cause the community is white and male, doesn't mean there aren't women and people of color interested in these issues -- it's on you to reach out and involve them in the conversation!


What empowerment looks like to me is to provide the support of encouragement and resources to artists of any skill level, to provide an artist an inclusive community and room to grow.   
This does raise the questions "what types of resources and encouragements can be provided - and which are most effective?"

The secondary goals are really great.  It's good that listeners are accounted for here, as they are an extremely important part of the mix.

The word "promote" is used here & there in the text.  You might make a shift toward education and advocacy, as the word "promote" is more of a marketing concept.  I don't think an org like this would want to promote any artist or release, but might use an artist or release as an illustration toward the the aim of education about CC music in a general sense and advocating the benefits of using CC for music.  Do you get my drift about the difference here?   

The text makes some mention about -ND and -NC, does the org take a specific position in regards to those CC modifiers? see section VII
Does the org have a specific position on free versus commercial music? see section VII
Looks like you're already discussing these questions, which is good, that will need to be settled before you can really figure out what  you want to do.

Proposed activities section.
I suggest the fewer activities the better, at least at the outset, you can always grow later if you find that your activities are helping.  
All activities really need to be justified by the mission statement.   
Which activities support educating people about the benefits of using CC?
Which activities support educating listeners about the benefits of listening to CC music?
Which activities provide resources and/or encouragement to those already listening to music / making music using CC licenses?

I would suggest that starting a netlabel and/or doing merchandising would put the org in the position of an arbiter of taste, leaving the impression of bias.  If that's what you want to do, that's cool, but I think the org could be more useful if it doesn't take a position about whether one artist is really cool or not - all artists are cool.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding your thrust.  I mean individually we all already have platforms for saying what we think is cool, right?   
Does the org want to be in a position of denying someone access to release due to perceived lack of quality or interest … does it want to focus on a roster of artists / podcasters to the exclusion of others?  If so, maybe it is more like a label.   

Random thoughts:  
The biggest gripe I hear from underground musicians is that it's tough to find an audience.  From a potential audience perspective, it appears that there's just a teaming stew of individuals out there making stuff trying to call attention to themselves, and there's no way of efficiently finding something you might like.  I have advocated for a "centralization" of netlabel musician community for a while… a "way in" - but I still don't know precisely how such a thing would look.  I sometimes think about a recommendation engine coupled with a quasi-randomized, streaming player a la Last.FM using sound assets housed at archive.org, FMA, sonic squirrel, bandcamp & standalone netlabels… but that would be a technological nightmare to implement.  <-- probably not. Libre.fm already does this, but is limited only to libre artists. I don't think there's anything in the code that would make this limitation, other than the API calls...which should be simple to change. Of course, we'd need a server. CCJam and CCHits already do this to a certain extent as well.


This may be a starting point for brainstorming though!  Perhaps just a randomized suggestion engine?  There is a need for something simple, easy & personalized to make CC music less daunting for a potential listener, to get under-appreciated artists listened to.   

I've also advocated for a more community-oriented promotional strategy among artists.  If there's a room of people each yelling at me individually to listen to their stuff, I'm going to walk out, but if they start talking as a community - "Listen to us, we have many talented artists"… that's easier to digest isn't it?  I think the "us" is the netlabel-community or CC Musicians writ large.  This requires a mental shift, less talking about "me" and more about "we" - this may be a tenet to advocate for, it's worth considering.

To educate CC music practitioners and users about best practices.

How about educating about proper ID3 tagging?
How-to tutorials on uploading to archive.org / sonic squirrel etc.  (the one I found for archive was woefully incorrect & misleading)

(admittedly I'm speaking from a point of view of bias toward internet-music)

The other day Lee Rosevere discovered that NPR had used some of his music in a video.  It credited him by name, but lacked the link attribution.  He contacted them personally to try to get them to add a link.  Maybe an org might be able to intervene on his behalf?  To educate other organizations on the proper way to attribute work?  Attribution is really poorly implemented across the board, and is REALLY important to artists growing an audience!  Educate about best practices.

Perhaps a legal defense fund?   

Perhaps an org could contact Google Labs to work on a CC / PD sound search tool?  (they already have cc image search, why not sound?)

What services are already being provided by other orgs?  How does the potential activities conflict or complement those?

If CC is the thrust of the org, perhaps seeking a partnership with CC org might be advantageous? -- I'm thinking funding / awareness-raising. <-- I did send this to Jessica, per Section IX. Maybe Tom and I can talk to Elliot when he comes on the show on May 9th (to be released May 11th)