[cc-licenses] PROCEDURAL SUGGESTION

melanie dulong de rosnay melanie.dulong-de-rosnay at cersa.org
Wed Oct 4 11:38:11 EDT 2006


hi all,

at CC France we don't need to have this debate closed today and i  
agree with Tom that people who don't agree with the amended anti-TPM  
clause should be able to continue to discuss until hopefully some  
kind of consensus or the strong feeling that consensus will not be  
reached now (within a few days/weeks).

i do agree with the anti-TPM clause so that CC granted rights are not  
restricted, i don't see why the additional transaction cost to  
negotiate an authorization to wrap CC content in DRM could not be  
carried by those who already carry the cost of developing a business.

and yes Paul and others it is impossible to follow all the exchanges  
& arguments, so would the other people please send, when they feel  
the discussion is close to an end, maybe with an new object title, a  
*shorter* summary of the DRMDave et al use cases explaining why which  
use cases could be prevented by the anti-TPM clause, because it is  
too complicated for me to understand without reading posts at least  
twice and maybe therefore further discussion in longer posts is  
needed by the people who really understand these use cases.
i think i did understand one argument proposing to remove the anti- 
TPM clause in BY or non NC licenses because licensors using BY may be  
ok with almost anything but we're not sure of this and we should tend  
to keep the system uniform for all options.

thanks, melanie

Le 4 oct. 06 à 16:48, Patrick Peiffer a écrit :

> because parallel distribution
> - is too complex in practice
> - has only esoteric use cases at the moment,
> and:
> - the non-exclusive nature of CC allows for nearly every possible way
> out of this for licensors anyway, including DRM,
> - we don't like to see TPMs restricting CC given rights,
> - we're pragmatic and it's only v3.0...
>
> ...BUT we really want to port this 3.0 nationally for 2007, so for all
> practical purposes of this public discussion, we consider the TPM
> question resolved.
>
> regards, patrick, cc-lu
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses




More information about the cc-licenses mailing list