[cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sat Sep 30 22:40:24 EDT 2006
On Saturday 30 September 2006 10:13 pm, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-30-09 at 20:51 -0400, drew Roberts wrote:
> > > Imagine, if you will, DRM Dave's Web site, with a section for
> > > unencumbered works that can be either played as-is or easily converted
> > > to play on _many_other_ platforms _but_not_his_own_. In other words,
> > > he's hosting files for Works that his customers can't play. His market
> > > advantage over his competitors is nil -- in fact, he's got a
> > > disadvantage, since people can _play_ all the CC-SA music available on
> > > his platform somewhere else, _and_do_more_with_it_too_.
> > But all of the non-CC works on his site are unavailable anywhere else and
> > can only play on his player. And those ones are way more popular than the
> > CC ones.
> But Creative Commons doesn't have any control over those other works.
> They're not even in the field of discussion right now. As you said,
> they're way more popular than CC ones, and keeping CC ones off his
> platform won't be a big hit for him.
You seem to have faith that we will never get to the point where only Single
Source DRM only players are available. I, on the other hand, am not so sure.
> > > Why is this sad-sack figure with the bullet-hole through his foot an
> > > unacceptable threat to our Freedom?
> > Sort of like MS can't play ogg files out of the box? And why should that
> > be? (You have to squint just right to see this point.)
> Yeah, I don't see it. If your point is that manufacturers of DRM-only
> platforms are going to try to lock out CC-licensed works, well, I'd
> agree that's a bad thing. We should try to prevent it, and having an
> anti-DRM clause in the licenses isn't the best way to do that.
I am not concerned that they will lock out CC works. It is more that I will
have to pay them to listen to CC licensed works.
> > do you really not see where this can go? (I will be generous and assume
> > you don't.)
> > 1. Network effects.
> > 2. Volume cost reduction effects.
> > 3. Laws.
> > 4. Corporate mergers / monopolies.
> > 5. Patents / monopolies.
> > 6. All the big copyright holders insist that they will only license
> > content to play on players that only play "protected" files and refuse to
> > play non-protected files.
> > I feel like I could go on and on.
> All I'm hearing is that DRM is making great inroads. I agree. Locking
> ourselves out of the game just to be sniffy is a bad idea. Using the
> platforms but preserving users' rights is the best way to deal with this
OK, so why not talk of allowing it only where general users can apply the DRM
if they wish? Or what about a non-distribute on DRM versions of CC files?
all the best,
(da idea man)
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
More information about the cc-licenses