<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/20575/Guide_to_Creative_Commons_Media_for_Videographers</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:57:31 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>Excellent Article</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?338160</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?338160</guid>
			<description>CC resources are excellent and few people seem to know of them. They are handy for video work, however ive found them also useful when doing presentations using keynote, sometimes having a good musical intro piece really warms the audience up and give the presentation a flair.<br />
<br />
By far my fravourite musical CC content has to be Nine Inch Nail's Ghosts, mostly instrument and are pretty diverse and useful for a great many things.<br />
<br />
Once again excellent article.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (REM2000)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Too broad.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?338161</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?338161</guid>
			<description>This was a decent article, I think it highlights the problem when people simply refer to works being creative commons though. <br />
<br />
CC-ND and CC-NC are non-free licenses, worlds apart from CC-SA, and CC-BY.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:13:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (JMcCarthy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
