Thanks for your valuable opinion. Much appreciated!

In terms of what the right thing to do with licensing stuff, if you own the copyrights to your work (which it sounds like you do), you can basically do whatever you want. I think letting fans remix your stems will give you some good exposure, and to set that up, you can license your stems under one of the creative commons licenses, or under pretty much any license that you want.

But since you’re trying to cultivate a fanbase, I wouldn’t be too concerned about your rights at this point. Creative commons should work for you at this point. Just be clear with your fans as to what the licensing structure is.

For more on Copyright law, check out http://evolvingmusic.wordpress.com/2008/06/13/wtf-is-music-publishing/

i think Radiohead’s idea is really great and now I’m seeing the extent that technology has changed!

I’ll stop being off-topic now.

I would like to get as much exposure as possible for my music. This include providing vocal track for fan’s remixes and creating music video competition.

How do I let my fans know about these licensing issue? Or should I just ignore all these legal stuff, since I own the copyright.

This is a data viz nerd’s wet dream, and the remixes it can spawn are going to be INSANE - because the data itself is what you’re remixing with… creating endless varieties of a/v bad-ass-ery . … Geometric Informatics scanning systems produce st…

Yes, I agree. We’ll have more on CC actually, probably later this week. ccMixter is fantastic. I meant only that a lot of labels and artists remain resistant … sometimes to even the idea of doing dedicated stems with or without CC, sometimes just out of laziness, I think.

The visual stems idea would be fairly new, of course… there are visuals out there under these licenses, but I haven’t seen a musical artist really pursue a specific release.