[cc-licenses] Version 3.0 - Public Discussion

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Aug 13 09:05:05 EDT 2006

On Saturday 12 August 2006 05:44 pm, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-12-08 at 15:28 +0100, Rob Myers wrote:
> > If someone only has an MP3 player with
> > DRM on it they have worse problems than not being able to use CC-
> > licensed works.
> They definitely do. But we can't solve any of those person's other
> problems.
> The question is really where our control point is. Creative Commons, and
> this mailing list, don't have direct control over what types of DRM are
> created, what computers, portable devices, and entertainment centres
> people buy. Creative Commons does have control over the terms of the
> licenses.
> So, if we want to let someone with a DRM-required player listen to Free
> music, we can waste a lot of time enjoining them to send letters to
> their congressperson or member of Parliament, or telling them to go
> spend another $250 on another player, or break the (unjust) law and do
> some circumvention process.
> OR, we can just let them listen to the damn music on their player.

First let me say that I am not against solving this issue in a good way, but 
you know what, there is a part of me that says that if someone doesn't care 
if their choice of player negatively impacts me and my rights due to network 
effects, then why should I care if they can play my Free (libre) stuff that I 
am giving them for free (gratis) on their player? Assuming a $250 player and 
a buck a song, let them take the savings from me and 249 others like me and 
buy a better player, one that respects my rights and theirs. If they can't be 
bothered, why should I care about them? (Admittedly, it is probably not the 
best part of me saying that, but there you have it.)
> ~Evan

all the best,

(da idea man)
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list