[cc-licenses] 912 emails about DRM

zotz at 100jamz.com zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Apr 22 14:43:08 EDT 2012


On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 09:30:05 +0900, David Chart <bydosa at davidchart.com>
wrote:
> On 2012/04/21, at 3:35, Rob Myers wrote:
> 
>> A five-ton sculpture can be photographed, sketched, or copied in
>> miniature. All may be acts restricted by copyright.
>>
>>> However, the creator might still want to allow that if you can, and
>>> definitely allow the creation of derivative works as long as you sharealike.
>>
>> If DRM is added to the work they will not however be able to do so
>> without risking legal action.
> 
> Are you absolutely sure about this? I can photograph, sketch, or copy
> in miniature scenes from a Blu-ray move without circumventing the DRM.
> Putting the disk in a legal Blu-ray player and displaying the result
> on a screen is obviously not circumvention; that's the intended use of
> the DRM. The BY-SA licence then clearly gives me the right to make
> derivatives of the images that I can now see.
> 
> As far as I can see, there are two risk cases here, which I'll call
> User and Adaptor.
> 
> User gets a copy of work A, which is licensed under CC-CY-SA, and
> which has DRM. User would like to copy it, but may not, because of the
> DRM.
> 
> Permission to circumvent gets round this problem in jurisdictions
> where the rights holder in the work may grant permission to circumvent
> the DRM, or when the rights holder also has the right to grant
> permission to circumvent a particular DRM.
> 
> Parallel distribution makes the situation no different from parallel
> distribution of a work, B, under CC and ARR, which you have said you
> are happy with. If I have the DRM version of work A, I have, at worst,
> the rights I would have with the ARR version of work B (none). In both
> cases, I can look for the CC version, but until I find it, I don't
> have the legal right to make the copies.
> 

Oh, but the situation is different. For BY-SA at least.

Person 1 can take his own copyrighted work and distribute it under
BY-SA and ARR.
Person 1 can take his own copyrighted work and distribute it
"protected" by DRM and in the clear.

Person 2 can take person 1's BY-SA licensed copyrighted work and
distribute it under BY-SA.
Person 2 cannot take person 1's BY-SA licensed copyrighted work and
distribute it ARR.

Person 2 can make a derivative of person 1's BY-SA licensed copyrighted
work and distribute it under BY-SA.
Person 2 cannot make a derivative of person 1's BY-SA licensed
copyrighted work and distribute it ARR.

Person 2 needs to seek person 1's permission to do the "cannots" above.

You want person 2 to be able to take person 1's BY-SA work and
distribute it or a derivative of it "protected" by DRM and in the clear
elsewhere without seeking person 1's permission. This is different than
the dual license situation.

all the best,

drew


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list