[cc-licenses] Parallel Distribution Statement

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Wed Nov 29 19:20:43 EST 2006


On Wednesday 29 November 2006 07:09 pm, Rob Myers wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:29:17 +0000 rob at robmyers.org wrote:
> >> an imaginary Debian Legal listmember's
> >> objection that it discriminates against a field of endeavor (DFSG-7
> >> IIRC).
> >
> > Just to nitpick: it's DFSG#6 (No Discrimination Against Fields of
> > Endeavor); see [1] for further details.
>
> D'oh. Clause 6. Thank you.
>
> > Wait one second: are you claiming that CC-v3.0draft anti-DRM clause is
> > equivalent to GPLv3draft2 one?
> >[...]
> > I think that the GPLv3draft2 one implicitly allows parallel distribution
> > (at least in cases where the DRM can be applied by anyone): the reason
> > is that the clause focuses on "modes of conveying", rather than on
> > imposition of DRM on the work.
>
> Hmmm. I see what you mean. And given Mia's comment on the intent of the
> CC licenses, this may be the case for the CC licenses as well.
>
> So do we really need a dual distribution clause anyway? Is it in fact
> the requirement to provide an unencumbered copy that is not currently
> present in the license and would require a dual distibution clause to
> introduce?
>
> Oh, the irony if that is the case. :-)
>
> But then we get on to who can legally add DRM to a work.
>
> > Conveying through DRM-encumbered media or channels seems to be allowed
> > as long as final recipients are not denied the freedoms granted by the
> > license.
>
> This would be good for streaming internet radio using RealAudio for
> example. And possibly for the Zune case (at least for ND work, and
> ignoring Fair Use).
>
> > Conveying through a DRM-*un*encumbered media or channel in
> > parallel to the DRM-encumbered one, seems to be enough to re-enable the
> > full exercise of the legal rights granted by the license, at least in
> > cases where anyone is allowed to apply the DRM to modified versions of
> > the work.
>
> But if everyone is allowed to apply DRM to modified versions of the work
> they do not need to receive DRM versions of the work as they can apply
> the DRM to the original version themselves.

Hence it just being a matter of convience as I have pointed out. They can do 
it for themselves, so why not let me do it for them and give a file with it 
already done.

I don't see any reason to appose the DRM witt paralled distribution in cases 
where anyone can apply the DRM.

Does anyone see a reason?
>
> - Rob.

all the best,

drew
-- 
(da idea man)
National Novel Writing Month
http://www.nanowrimo.org/index.php
861,535,038 words and counting.



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list