Case Studies/Sita Sings The Blues - Revision history

Mikemollan123: /* License Usage */

2012-10-25T12:03:04Z

‎License Usage

Mikemollan123: /* Overview */

2012-10-25T12:02:32Z

‎Overview

Jimmy92: /* Motivations */

2012-10-09T15:36:22Z

‎Motivations

Jimmy92: /* License Usage */

2012-10-09T15:35:19Z

‎License Usage

U.S. Curator: add category

2011-09-08T20:52:09Z

add category

Akozak at 22:51, 2 September 2010

2010-09-02T22:51:01Z

Akozak at 21:34, 2 September 2010

2010-09-02T21:34:58Z

CCID-jane at 18:11, 31 August 2010

2010-08-31T18:11:36Z

Cameron Parkins at 03:12, 1 December 2009

2009-12-01T03:12:03Z

Cameron Parkins: /* Motivations */

2009-12-01T03:05:40Z

‎Motivations

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:03, 25 October 2012
Line 26:		Line 26:

	'''Sita Sings The Blues''' is released under a [CC Attribution-Share Alike license], a decision Paley came to after her experience trying to license Annette Hanshaw's music.		'''Sita Sings The Blues''' is released under a [CC Attribution-Share Alike license], a decision Paley came to after her experience trying to license Annette Hanshaw's music.
		+	[http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/faq.html '''Sita Sings The Blues''' FAQ]

	== Motivations ==		== Motivations ==

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 '''Sita Sings the Blues''' is an animated feature-length film from Nina Paley. It has achieved wide levels of success, both commercially and in press, without the help of traditional press methods or large studio backing. Released under a CC Attribution-Share Alike license, the film is a prime example of 'open-source cinema'.
-You can read more about the film at the [http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/faq.html '''Sita Sings The Blues''' FAQ].
+You can read more about the film at the .
 == License Usage ==

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 Paley describes her motivation for using a CC BY-SA license at length in her featured interview at [http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/14760 creativecommons.org]:
-<blockquote>
 I want my film to reach the widest audience. It costs money to run a theater; it costs money to manufacture DVDs; it costs money to make and distribute 35mm film prints. It’s essential I allow people to make money distributing Sita these ways and others; otherwise, no one will do it. So I eschewed the “non commercial” license. Share Alike would “protect” the work from ever being locked up. It’s better than Public Domain; works are routinely removed from the Public Domain via privatized derivatives (just try making your own Pinocchio). I didn’t want some corporation locking up a play or TV show based on Sita. They are certainly welcome to make derivative works, and make money from them; in fact I encourage this. But they may not sue or punish anyone for sharing those works.
 <br /><br />
 I looked to the Free Software movement as a model. The CC BY-SA license most closely resembles the GNU GPL, which is the foundation of Free Software. People make plenty of money in Free Software; there’s no reason they can’t do the same in Free Culture, except for those pernicious “non commercial” licenses. A Share Alike license eliminates the corporate abuse everyone’s so afraid of, while it encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. Everyone wins, especially the artist!
 == Profit Breakdown ==

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 == License Usage ==
-'''Sita Sings The Blues''' is released under a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ CC Attribution-Share Alike license], a decision Paley came to after her experience trying to license Annette Hanshaw's music.
+'''Sita Sings The Blues''' is released under a [CC Attribution-Share Alike license], a decision Paley came to after her experience trying to license Annette Hanshaw's music.
 == Motivations ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:52, 8 September 2011
Line 48:		Line 48:
	* Revenue from Central Cinema in Seattle which showed the film: $4,000		* Revenue from Central Cinema in Seattle which showed the film: $4,000
	* Grand total: $55,000		* Grand total: $55,000
		+
		+	[[Category:USA]]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |importance=High
 |quality=A-Class
-|Description='''Sita Sings the Blues''' is a musical, animated personal interpretation of the Indian epic the Ramayana released under a CC Attribution-Share Alike license.
+|Description=Sita Sings the Blues is a musical, animated personal interpretation of the Indian epic the Ramayana released under a CC Attribution-Share Alike license.
 |Quote=I want my film to reach the widest audience. It costs money to run a theater; it costs money to manufacture DVDs; it costs money to make and distribute 35mm film prints. It’s essential I allow people to make money distributing Sita these ways and others; otherwise, no one will do it. So I eschewed the “non commercial” license. Share Alike would “protect” the work from ever being locked up [...] a Share Alike license eliminates the corporate abuse everyone’s so afraid of, while it encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. Everyone wins, especially the artist!
 |Quote_Attribution=Nina Paley

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Case Study
 |Description='''Sita Sings the Blues''' is a musical, animated personal interpretation of the Indian epic the Ramayana released under a CC Attribution-Share Alike license.
 |Quote=I want my film to reach the widest audience. It costs money to run a theater; it costs money to manufacture DVDs; it costs money to make and distribute 35mm film prints. It’s essential I allow people to make money distributing Sita these ways and others; otherwise, no one will do it. So I eschewed the “non commercial” license. Share Alike would “protect” the work from ever being locked up [...] a Share Alike license eliminates the corporate abuse everyone’s so afraid of, while it encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. Everyone wins, especially the artist!
@@ Line 10: / Line 11: @@
 |User_Status=Creator
 |Tag=cinema, animation
-|License short name=CC BY-SA
+|License_short_name=CC BY-SA
 |License=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
 |Format=MovingImage

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:12, 1 December 2009
Line 34:		Line 34:
	I looked to the Free Software movement as a model. The CC BY-SA license most closely resembles the GNU GPL, which is the foundation of Free Software. People make plenty of money in Free Software; there’s no reason they can’t do the same in Free Culture, except for those pernicious “non commercial” licenses. A Share Alike license eliminates the corporate abuse everyone’s so afraid of, while it encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. Everyone wins, especially the artist!		I looked to the Free Software movement as a model. The CC BY-SA license most closely resembles the GNU GPL, which is the foundation of Free Software. People make plenty of money in Free Software; there’s no reason they can’t do the same in Free Culture, except for those pernicious “non commercial” licenses. A Share Alike license eliminates the corporate abuse everyone’s so afraid of, while it encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. Everyone wins, especially the artist!
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
		+
		+	== Profit Breakdown ==
		+
		+	via [http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/11/23/how-to-make-55000-by-giving-away-your-work/ '''The Wall Street Journal''']:
		+
		+	* Total donations from people who appreciate her giving out free content: $23,000
		+	* Profits from her online store which sells merchandise and DVDs: $19,000
		+	* Theatrical distribution revenues: $3,000 (out of total box office tally of $22,350)
		+	* Additional DVD distribution: $3,000
		+	* Broadcast television distribution: $3,000
		+	* Revenue from Central Cinema in Seattle which showed the film: $4,000
		+	* Grand total: $55,000