Crimperman.org

Brief version: Frustrated by restrictive licencing stifling what should be free worship and resources, I am looking for like-minded Christians to discuss a proposal to produce an on-line directory of Christian resources which have freedom built in. See http://m108.crimperman.org for further details and to join the discussion

Okay that’s a bit of a grand title but hopefully it got your attention. As you may know I am a keen advocate of freedom in Christian resources such as music, art and writing. This site is covered by a licence which explicitly permits you to redistribute the material as long as you don’t stop others doing so. I’ve also written about the subject of freedom in the way Christian resources are provided and used in two previous posts.

• Christianity that doesn’t spread from the fridge
• Taking risks and freeing up worship

The latter invoked a bit of discussion, some on here and some with friends offline and I would like to thank all those who have discussed this already for giving me a bit of a kickstart.

The m108 galaxy ( image from http://www.astr.ua.edu/gifimages/m108.html )

Copyright and restrictive licencing of resources is a reasonably hot topic right now and the Church has not escaped. I have noted a shift in support for what is known in some circles and the open content movement. Others have waxed more lyrically than I could on the subject but in generally it involves content creators moving away from draconian imposition and towards freeing up users to use their content including sharing it with others and remixing it. The most popular of these efforts with regard media and arts is the Creative Commons – which is what I use here.  In the Church as I have already written it seems frankly daft that those who are using God given gifts to create wonderful ways to give him glory would seriously want to sue a fellow Christian for making an additional photocopy. Churches and church  leaders are finding themselves navigating through a minefield of legal requirements which prohibit the free movement and growth of the Church itself.

It seems frankly daft that those who are using God given gifts to create wonderful ways to give him glory would seriously want to sue a fellow Christian for making an additional photocopy

To a certain extent you can’t blame the musicians, writers and artists because they are following the only pattern they see – that of big business. We are in a world where music and words, art and poetry have become “Intellectual Property” (a term which still does not have a proper legal definition in most places). IP is something which we treat as precious, as some kind of golden goose. We dare not let it go in case it never comes back. And yet this does not sit well with the Jesus I know, who turned the tables on those making a profit from worship in the temple, who said “Freely you have received, freely give.” or as the Message puts it …

You have been treated generously, so live generously. _{Matt 10:8 MSG}

The next step

But what if we do let it go? What if we say “copy it just don’t sell it”? I fear that if we continue down this path the Church, even more than greater society, may stifle itself in a fog of restrictions and fear. As Christians we want to do the right thing so I am not advocating we start copying that which we are not permitted to. I am suggesting that rather than break the law we use it. I am suggesting that we, content creators, free the users of the content we have made so they can glorify God with it.

But how do we do that? What form should it take? What about…?

Exactly. before we take the “next step” we need to make sure we know where we are headed. For that purpose I have set up a discussion forum to discuss this proposition. Specifically to discuss a web-based directory of Christian resources with freedom built in. For now I have called this project The m108 project as an homage to Matthew 10:8 but even the name of the project is up for discussion. I have since discovered that m108 is the name given to a galaxy within the constellation of Ursa Major (The great bear). This galaxy (pictured above) is described as having “no noticeably strong center, being a motley collection of features often referred to, in classic understatement, as very dusty”. I like that.

So if you are a user, maker or observer of Christian music, art, literature, liturgy, youth and children’s work, video – pretty much anything which the Church at large could use to glorify God, please hop over to http://m108.crimperman.org . I know this is a cliche but this time your opinion, your view really counts. This project won’t take off or grow unless it represents us, God’s family. Feel free to comment here but if you have a view or question on this matter please consider contributing your comments at the m108 site. Right now we need discussion, no more.

Honestly I have no idea if this is going to work but I feel that we have to at least try. It’s not enough for me to do this alone and while it is small I take comfort from the fact that when Jesus fed thousands from a packed lunch he got his disciples to share it around and he did a great deal with a small amount. Taking part will not tag you as involved, I won’t chase you up to do more later but I would say that in my experience God might.  But surely that’s not a bad thing is it?

Way back in 2005 (was it really that long ago) I posted a piece on my blog entitled “Christianity that doesn’t spread from the fridge“.

In that I explained how the use of copyright can stifle the spread of worship and faith among churches. I also focused on the ridiculous situation that means the vehicles of worship and relationship that God has inspired his people to create are locked down and used as revenue generators rather than faith-builders. If you read this blog long enough you’ll soon discover I am a fan of freedom and for creative works (including the text and artwork on this site) I encourage the use of Creative Commons licences. My spreading from the fridge piece ended with a rallying cry:

So here’s a wake up call to the Christian publishers, Bible houses, Song composers and authors of today: Think about why you do that work? If it’s for God’s glory and the furtherance of God’s kingdom then are you not restricting the very purpose of that work by restricting the fair usage of it by others? Christianity is about risks – take one with the work you do for him and see if God likes it.

I’m happy to say that I’ve found somebody who has. I’m not for a second claiming that they did because of anything I wrote – I doubt they’ve even heard of me – but when I found the music it blessed me. Yes I know that can be a cheesy phrase, all too often bandied around but in this instance it’s the most accurate description I can use.

Take Me In | live worship | freely download | freely use

Murray Bunton of Australia has produced and made available a live album of great original songs and made them available under a Creative Commons licence. I’m never any good at music reviews so I’m not going to try and explain where these songs fit in the spectrum of Christian music. What I will say is that the songs on this album are of a high quality – in terms of the writing, performance and production.

Murray has also made the recordings, the lyrics  and the guitar chord sheets freely available under the same licence as my artwork: the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share-Alike licence. This means you can use them, copy them, pass them around as much as you like without charge or penalty. You just can’t sell them or use them in a comercial venture. Seems entirely fair to me and I applaud and thank Murray for this step. Others will be greatly encouraged by the music and further still by the decision to allow the works to be freely used in their intended purpose.

If you produce or know of other Christian worship songs under a Creative Commons licence, feel free to post a link as a comment here.

In New Zealand a new law is about to be passed. Under Section92A, any internet user can have their connection cut off if the givernment suspects they’ve been infringing copyright. No proof, no evidence, no day in court. It becomes law on Feb 28.

Across the web people are mounting a blackout campaign – Twitter, Facebook and other profile pictures are being replaced by a black square and bloggers are getting in on the act as well.

I, for one, am glad to join their ranks. Lot’s of people infringe copyright and it’s wrong but to be found guilty by accusation is worse. As a Christian, a web-user and a producer of artwork – I find this law disturbing and immoral.

I have long been a fan of the open source philosophy along with others like Creative Commons. I like the way they allow you to distribute things in a fair manner whilst still protecting the author or the work to the extent they prefer. Much better than the restrictive and prohibitive copyright licences used so often today. This blog is distributed under a Creative commons licence. Basically you can distribute it without penalty or charge as long as you give others the same rights.

Recently it struck me how much the Christian viewpoint is left unhindered by such licences and how much it is hindered and impinged by copyright and publishing law.

Take for example a worship or praise song. In days of old, hymns were written by men and women for the use of all, without penalty, and the for the glory of God. They may have been published or distributed by word of mouth but rarely was there a restriction on their use. In short the aim of the author was to glorify God and they saw no reduction of this aim by allowing as many people as possible to freely and fairly use their works to this end.

These days? Somebody writes a song, releases it on a CD and then releases the sheet music under a copyright licence. Suddenly churches using these songs – to glorify God – are left with a minefield of legalese to overcome so that they are not “robbing” the author of their livlihood. Payments to copyright agencies (aren’t these just protection rackets?) abound on the off chance that you may use a song that was (shock) written to be used in that way.

In short, in 1850 somebody could write a hymn and churches could use it. Somebody hearing it in one church could introduce it to another without breaking the law. These days, you hear a song in one church, ask the musician for a copy of the sheet music and, if it is handed over, both of you are breaking the law. Result? songs that are written to worship God are not allowed to do so because it would impinge on the “rights” of the author. The same author who wrote the song to worship God! What is really meant by “rights” is “income”. If no copyright is placed on the music, or so the philosiphy goes, then you and I could distribute and sell said music and rob the author of their livlihood from selling the stuff they’ve written.

Imagine if people like Hillsongs, Survivor and Kingsway published their sheet music under a Creative Commons licence? You would be freely allowed to copy and distribute the sheet music but not sell it. So the song is used for it’s intended purpose (worshipping God) by many more churches, none of whom are breaking the law by doing so, none of whom are paying a licence fee just because they used a song in it’s indended purpose. But only the original composer/publisher may sell the song. This means a CD with it on continues to earn the composer a royalty.

Transpose this to Bibles. There are some great modern translation of the Bible. Some of you may not like them, everyone has their favourites. There are also some great computer programs to help us read and study the bible. But unless someone pays a licence then this software often only includes public domain translations like the KJV. “But if you want to use it you should pay for it” you say. fair enough but let’s take the New Century Version for example (the same applies to other versions).

I own two paper copies of the NCV in differing sizes and with differing extra bits. I also own a Palm Pilot PDA with some bible software on it. In order for me to read the NCV on my Palm Pilot I must buy another version of it. Okay so far I’m with this, seems fair. But I also own desktop bible software which doesn’t come with the NCV. I think it’s fair usage for me to want to use the same elcetronic version in two programs but only one at a time. I’ve bought the Bible (a few times now) – the translators, publishers et al have been rewarded for their work – I just want to use it on two programs. To me, this is like reading it in two different chairs. But no I would have to either wait for the software company to bring out an NCV module and then buy that one or use differing translations in differing places.

Again, suppose I have an electronic copy of a bible. I come across a friend who cannot afford one but would like one. Or I come across a friend who – not being a Christian – would like to look into the Bible on a try before you buy-in basis. I could tell both these people to go buy a modern version but doesn’t it come across as more gracious for me to give them a copy? Wouldn’t it more in the spirit of Christ for me to not expect them to pay? “So give them yours” you say – can’t it’s licenced to me and not transferrable. “Buy them one” you say – can’t because it’s no longer available for their operating system. “Copy yours – the publisher won’t mind” – no they may not mind (mostly because they wouldn’t know) but it is still illegal to do this – what does that tell my friends?

If digital versions of Bibles used Creative Commons licences then I could freely use it on any software I liked and pass it to friends for their use. At the same time I would not be allowed to sell it – only if the publisher authorises it.

“So” you’re thinking, “if the publishers use Creative Commons licences and allow you to give their stuff away – why would anyone buy them? They still lose money.”

Well, no they don’t the paper versions are still under copyright law. The recorded version of songs are also still under copyright and publishing law. And in fact if someone is given an electronic copy of a particular translation and uses it regularly, it would make sense to assume that when it comes to buying their own paper version they would plumb for the same translation.

Some authors have found that when they published their books under a Creative commons licence electronically, sales of the paper version have not dropped but been enhanced by the free distribution of the electronic one.

The point

Okay so here’s the point of this post…

It strikes me that a major aim of Christians is to become more Christ like. This would be the Christ who said “Freely you have received, freely give” then and who turned the tables on the temple sellers for making unfair profits from those who simply wanted to follow God’s way?

Where would Christianity be today if the gospel and epistle writers had prohibited copying and distribution of their writings without royalty payments? Where would we be today had people like John Wycliffe and William Tyndale had slapped copyright all over their translation or if Charles Wesley or John Newton had done the same with their hymns?

What would have happened? Christianity would have died along with the hope of humankind that it brings.

Perhaps you’re thinking that those people weren’t in this age, they didn’t need to be have been concerned about the “wrong” sorts of people corrupting their work from it’s purpose. Perhaps it’s true that they didn’t have to earn a living from their works. Perhaps these are true but most of them worked in conditions far less privielged than we do today. Most of them could have been killed if the “wrong” people got their hands on their work. Yet they did that work and they did for the higher purpose we all serve – the Kingdom of heaven.

So here’s a wake up call to the Christian publishers, Bible houses, Song composers and authors of today:

Think about why you do that work? If it’s for God’s glory and the furtherance of the God’s kingdom then are you not restricting the very purpose of that work by restricting the fair usage of it by others?

Christianity is about risks – take one with the work you do for him and see if God likes it.