• 0x4E4F@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        FOSS only applies to code, you can’t change the source of art. It’s art, you can either own it or just enjoy it (like when you go to museums). You can’t actually change it to the way you like it. You’d have to have and own the DAW’s working mastered project files to make it FOSS compatible. No one does that.

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          While it’s not entirely “source” and it’s not common, a few albums have been released with stem files.

          Nine Inch Nails is notable for being progressive in this area.

          • 0x4E4F@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I know that NIN does release the stem files with their releases, but it’s just 1 or 2 bands worldwide, most don’t do that.

            • Hawke@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Still it is a thing though.

              I was just making the point that conceptually “open source music” exists and has even been commercially released by notable artists.

        • ghostermonster@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Now I understand. So the problem with the root comment is that there can be FOSS software to play media you bought, but it still could be streamed and illegal to save or modify, so you don’t “own” the media in some sense.

          True that software and media are different things.