Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

funkwhale.audio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 306 posts

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#151

Post by glenstein »

bronco21016 wrote: post #133
IndySun wrote: post #113

"Hi, we're Funkwhale. We use cool words like decentralized, self-hosted, music, server, and of course, funk & whale. If we named it more honestly, then our defunding of musicians and creatives that depended on sales wouldn't get any love (not publicly anyway), plus the ethically vacant developers would have to work on it secretly. And to be sure, we ourselves do not create or rely on income from artistic endeavours,…

I initially downvoted you but after finally getting the project site to load I changed my mind. The project explicitly mentions many examples of sharing through federation and it seems to me they’re explicitly advocating for illegal sharing of music. Now, I certainly have plenty of issues with copyright and I tend to lean more towards “piracy isn’t a huge deal since we all want convenient (not free) access to media.”…

>The project explicitly mentions many examples of sharing through federation and it seems to me they’re explicitly advocating for illegal sharing of music.

They're explicitly against that in their docs:

>If you are uploading content purchased from other platforms or stores, you should upload it in a private library

>As a rule of thumb, only use public and local libraries for content for which you own the copyright or for content you know you can share with a wider audience.

They also noted that they have made changes to funkwhale out of copyright concerns:

>Managing the library at instance was cumbersome and dangerous: sharing an instance library over federation would quickly pose copyright issues, as well as opening public instances. It also made it impossible to only share a subset of the music.

https://docs.funkwhale.audio/users/upload.html

https://docs.funkwhale.audio/admin/0.17.html

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#152

Post by 52-6F-62 »

tchaffee wrote: post #116
_jal wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be sure you soundproof your home/apartment, and don't turn it up too much in the car. Don't want to accidentally leak any copyrighted joy to your neighbors without payment!

Seems like you are being sarcastic, but yes, if you play loud enough and to a big enough audience you do indeed owe royalties. In fact bars and restaurants are required to pay for this exact reason.

Exactly. Most often this is covered by the fact that the restaurant or bar is playing satellite or other radio which bears the broadcast permissions. And, the obvious—most people aren't horrible selfish goblins.

There's a definite difference between providing atmosphere in a restaurant, and providing the content as some sort of production, or providing others with broadcast-quality copies from a single master without permission of the artist.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#153

Post by magnostherobot »

IndySun wrote: post #148
StavrosK wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It congealed from an amorphous mass of nutrients in the bowels of the earth. What does it matter where it came from? Stealing deprives the owner of their good, copyright infringement does not, therefore they are not equal.

Sure. Your remarks only prove my point. But I am a realist. And I wouldn't keep focusing on music. It's an easy target. Audio happens to be my thing but I'm concerned at the cavalier attitude and on a broader level. Let's for one minute, expand the remit. It's not funkwhale, it's carwhale, foodwhale, healthwhale. Keep going. Keep thinking. If all we're doing is not creating anew, but instead forging special keys that…

There's a short sci-fi story (whose name escapes me, but is mentioned in Cory Doctorow's Information Doesn't Want to be Free) in which the human race is given matter duplicators that can perfectly copy an item, including the duplicators themselves. It's basically a more fully-explored version of the "what if I can copy a car" thought, in which I think the conclusion is that creativity would flourish because less effort is put into making many of the same item. It's quite a far-reaching hypothetical, but it has strong parallels with digital rights issues.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#155

Post by IndySun »

StavrosK wrote: post #149
IndySun wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Your remarks only prove my point. But I am a realist. And I wouldn't keep focusing on music. It's an easy target. Audio happens to be my thing but I'm concerned at the cavalier attitude and on a broader level. Let's for one minute, expand the remit. It's not funkwhale, it's carwhale, foodwhale, healthwhale. Keep going. Keep thinking. If all we're doing is not creating anew, but instead forging special keys that…

You insist on reading my argument of "it's not the same as theft" to "therefore it's fine". I didn't say whether it's better or worse than theft. I just said it's not the same, in the same way that murder or jaywalking is not the same as theft.

Not true, I'm not doing that, though you do seem to be reading parts of my remarks and not others. I shouldn't have replied specifically to you, I'm trying, and failing on deaf ears, to make a much broader point. I'll save it for the pub.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#156

Post by 52-6F-62 »

tchaffee wrote: post #147
_jal wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of ASCAP and the RIAA's (and friends) claims; I just don't uncritically accept them, let alone act as a volunteer copyright-cop for them. You are free to do whatever you like with your free time, of course.

> I just don't uncritically accept them, let alone act as a volunteer copyright-cop for them. It seems like you are implying I am. When all I'm trying to do is make sure musicians get fairly paid for their work. So yeah, I'm not super concerned about playing music loud in my car as you sarcastically suggested I should be. I am concerned about joining a music platform where something I purchased can be shared for free…

> cuts out ASCAP and RIAA

The sad thing for me, is that even if something like that were to function, and no matter how well, people would find another reason the artists don't deserve payment.

So as it stands, organizations like that are how artists get paid at all.

And not as any hard defence of the RIAA in all aspects, but it's not like they don't do anything. They did help set the standards for effective vinyl mastering and playback...

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#157

Post by tristanMatthias »

greggman3 wrote: post #118
dvno42 wrote: post #19

I've been using this for a little over a year and like it a lot but it lacks the music discovery features of commercial platforms (which becomes important when you have terabytes of music) and takes a lot of effort to organize music and create play lists. The music onboarding process typically starts with organizing metadata with Musicbrainz Picard then import the collection into Funkwhale's DB via a cli admin tool.…

Which music service's discovery features actually work? For me the only one that worked was Google Play Music. The rest have been total and utter crap at discovery.

I love Spotify’s. I discover new stuff every week because of it in a very broad range of musical categories

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#158

Post by _jal »

tchaffee wrote: post #147
_jal wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of ASCAP and the RIAA's (and friends) claims; I just don't uncritically accept them, let alone act as a volunteer copyright-cop for them. You are free to do whatever you like with your free time, of course.

> I just don't uncritically accept them, let alone act as a volunteer copyright-cop for them. It seems like you are implying I am. When all I'm trying to do is make sure musicians get fairly paid for their work. So yeah, I'm not super concerned about playing music loud in my car as you sarcastically suggested I should be. I am concerned about joining a music platform where something I purchased can be shared for free…

> It seems like you are implying I am.

You are here talking down the tool and implying software you have not used is not legal while uncritically repeating their claims, which are more aggressive than many copyright lawyers believe is accurate.

I'm sorry if you find my flip characterization uncharitable. If you need a less off-the-cuff one, you are uncritically lending your voice to the legacy copyright cartel's continuing attempts to monopolize music distribution.

That does do several things. Promoting fairness for musicians is not one of them.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#159

Post by StavrosK »

magnostherobot wrote: post #153
IndySun wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Your remarks only prove my point. But I am a realist. And I wouldn't keep focusing on music. It's an easy target. Audio happens to be my thing but I'm concerned at the cavalier attitude and on a broader level. Let's for one minute, expand the remit. It's not funkwhale, it's carwhale, foodwhale, healthwhale. Keep going. Keep thinking. If all we're doing is not creating anew, but instead forging special keys that…

There's a short sci-fi story (whose name escapes me, but is mentioned in Cory Doctorow's Information Doesn't Want to be Free) in which the human race is given matter duplicators that can perfectly copy an item, including the duplicators themselves. It's basically a more fully-explored version of the "what if I can copy a car" thought, in which I think the conclusion is that creativity would flourish because less effo…

Printcrime: https://ipfs.eternum.io/ipfs/QmTZo9mVX6JwN4hgCF7Ers1jJ9AMQkY...

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#160

Post by 52-6F-62 »

brmgb wrote: post #135
tchaffee wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I am only sharing with my family, then fine. But it looks like this software allows you to create a pod and share with whoever you invite. Which my purchase doesn't cover, right?

> Which my purchase doesn't cover, right? It most certainly does in my country (and probably in most of Europe I would hasard). The only thing you can't do is public performance and distribution but sharing it with your friends is definitely legal.

Without even looking at the law I'm going to guess there's some kind of clause about "within reason". As in, you can't reasonably claim that all 350,000 people who've downloaded the music you uploaded can be classified as "friends". That would certainly fall under broadcast or distribution licensing and legal terms.
Post reply on HN