[cc-licenses] 912 emails about DRM
bydosa at davidchart.com
Mon Apr 23 05:37:16 EDT 2012
On 2012/04/23, at 3:43, <zotz at 100jamz.com> <zotz at 100jamz.com> wrote:
> 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.
Yes, I'm perfectly well aware of this, thank you.
My point was that there are two possible places to be concerned: limits on the user, and the ability of a adaptor to close the work down.
DRM+Parallel+Permission to Circumvent means that the user can be no more limited than he is in *different* cases that everyone agrees are perfectly acceptable under the license.
The same set of permissions means that an adaptor cannot close the work down by releasing it DRM-encumbered, because he has to release it open as well.
Permission to circumvent is probably more useful in solving the first problem, and parallel distribution more important in blocking the second. So I now think the license should include both.
I think banning DRM distribution will condemn BY-SA works to a ghetto and create a license that no-one cares about because no-one releases any content under it that anyone finds interesting. Thus, I think a straight prohibition on DRM would actively harm the cause of free culture.
More information about the cc-licenses