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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes, exactly 👍.