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

MJ Ray mjr at phonecoop.coop
Sun Oct 1 17:05:45 EDT 2006

rob at robmyers.org wrote: [...]
> One solution for CC and Debian, based on the Scottish license language 
> that MJ Ray has mentioned, would be for CC to allow only ineffective 
> DRM to be applied. This would be DRM where blanket permission to 
> circumvent has been given *by the DRM vendor*, as is included in the 
> GPL-3.

or where the DRM does not restrict the recipient, or other situations 
we're probably not clever enough to think up ourselves.

> This would mean that GPL-3 DRM can be used on CC work, and would be a 
> synergy of the kind I have in mind between code and content. It would 
> also not restrict Free Software hackers from using CC work freely even 
> with those DRM systems, which would answer Debian's concerns.

I think it would.

> If Debian are proved right that CC licenses cannot prevent DRM and will only
> reduce freedom, that can be tackled when it becomes a problem.

We seem to agree on the basic requirements of freedom to enjoy, study, 
adapt and share, so why should it need blood before this loose cannon of 
anti-TPM language is secured?

If the pro-format-discrimination voices persuade CC to again refuse to 
fix an obvious *potential* problem before it becomes an *actual* 
problem, so causing overloaded volunteers yet more work, then I think 
that's inconsiderate beyond belief.

I wish I knew the detail of any other reasons for CC's formal rejection 
of source distribution as an option.  Complexity can be handled by 
importing a past solution from a working CC licence.  The effectiveness 
against monopolies is well-known from the GPL.  Practical problems like 
the size required for two copies will be reduced with time and also 
provide a strong incentive for non-TPM systems.  Where's the beef?

> But the genie cannot be put back in the bottle. A bit like that 
> official trademark Debian have that isn't DFSG-free.

IMO, it's fairly obvious how to fix that one, but it is not easy getting 
the relevant executives to act and the general resolution system is 
unseasonably busy just now with more widely-vexing matters like overall 
project leadership and what can honestly be put in the next release.

Hope that explains,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list