rob at robmyers.org
Tue Jan 24 15:34:38 EST 2012
On 21/01/12 01:41, drew Roberts wrote:
> On Friday 13 January 2012 15:22:55 Kent Mewhort wrote:
>> (of course, it
>> is always open for the original author to only distribute TPM'd versions in
>> the first place, but in this case I don't see why such an author would even
>> release under CC at all).
> Well, one reason is for the positive buzz without the correspondent
> On the whole though I see you main point re BY-SA versus the others.
DRM should be forbidden on *unmodified* work under non-SA licenses.
This is because otherwise the freedom that the license grants to receive
and use them, and in the case of non-ND licenses the power that they
give you to remove the freedom of others, is effectively removed.
BY derivatives should not be bound by the anti-DRM clause. But on that
basis should CC-BY-NC derivatives have to be NC? ;-)
More information about the cc-licenses