[cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Oct 1 20:04:41 EDT 2006


On Sunday 01 October 2006 11:53 am, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-10 at 11:18 -0400, Greg London wrote:
> > You can apply DRM to your local copy and play it on your
> > own hardware player. You just can't distribute that copy.
> > Alice and Bob can still play on a DRM platform.
>
> But they can't share with their neighbour. That's why the anti-DRM
> clause makes the licenses incompatible with freedom. If you can't share
> your copy, then the work isn't Free. Let's look at the Free Software
> Definition:

Why can't they share with their neighbour? Exactly. They still have their 
non-DRM version which they applied the DRM to, they can share that and their 
neighbour can put the DRM on his own version. Where is the problem in that? 
Or are you talking some other sharing?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
>
> I quote:
>
>         The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
>         person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system,
>         for any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required
>         to communicate about it with the developer or any other specific
>         entity. [...]
>
>         The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or
>         executable forms of the program, as well as source code, for
>         both modified and unmodified versions. (Distributing programs in
>         runnable form is necessary for conveniently installable free
>         operating systems.) It is ok if there is no way to produce a
>         binary or executable form for a certain program (since some
>         languages don't support that feature), but you must have the
>         freedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a
>         way to make them.
>
> You want to put other values -- some sort of macroeconomic manipulation,
> as far as I can tell -- ahead of the Freedom of people to share playable
> versions of works.
>
> Why? As far as I can tell it has to do with your idiosyncratic economic
> theories. I guess that's part of your personal frame of reference, but
> it doesn't gibe with mainstream Free Software and Free Content thinking.

all the best,

drew
-- 
(da idea man)
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list