[cc-community] What are your thoughts on [opt-in] anti-tivoization in CC-BY-SA 4.0?

Maciej Pendolski beholder0x100 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 21 18:28:18 EST 2011


On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> Let us say I mass-produce them. No SD slot or any digital or analogue
> ports, just an un-modifiable PCB and a cheap piezo speaker. You can hear
> the music, and record it using a microphone, but you cannot access the
> CC-BY-SA file without essentially destroying the PCB.
>
> Can I do that if the file is covered by anti-Tivoising CC-BY-SA?

If it would be a bit like in GPL then I guess it your snowball would
be in violation. But now that I think about it I'm not sure if
copyright-based licence would allow it at all. On the other hand if
GPL can do it why something else could not? We need a lawyer here (my
head is going to explode soon).

GPL (I know I have chopped it a lot (perhaps too much)):
"If you convey ... and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction
in which the right of possession and use of the User Product
(snowglobe) is transferred to the recipient ... the Corresponding ...
conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation
Information."
(a paragraph before it says what an installation information is)

Note: GPL later states this so I guess this would be different (unless
there would be remote updates for a snowglobe):
"But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third
party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User
Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM)."

I have no idea what is legally possible. Again, why there are no
lawyers around? Perhaps they just read all of this and laugh about us
trying to figure things out.


More information about the cc-community mailing list