[cc-licenses] license draft usage scenario questions

Jörg Zastrau dl1bku at gmail.com
Sat Oct 28 22:54:25 EDT 2006


The current discussion on the license draft is mind boggling. Hence
this query whether the following close-to-real-life scenario is
permitted under the current draft of the cc license.


Larry Learner would like to teach german to himself. As a good friend
I create some audio lessons for him. I do so by reading texts licensed
under the GNU FDL and the (say) by-sa license. I provide some
translation myself and I hereby create a derived work. Larry wants to
listen to the audio lessons on his portable audio player (so far, this
happened in the past).

Unfortunately Larry only owns a DRM-enabled portable audio player but
there is a legal way to record the home-grown audio to the player (key
is available).

Can I comply with the license terms if I download the audio to his player?


my problems:
- If the DRM-key is locked to the player (comparable to Garmin GPS
devices) then Larry cannot distribute his drm-enabled version to
somebody else in the future.
- The proposed parallel distribution might help, as Larry can
re-create the content using the backup or ask somebody else to do
this. However, other issues I do not fully understand (roundup see
[1]) are preventing this solution.
- so I might have to tell Larry, that I cannot do him this favour
because a "free" license is preventing me from doing so. I might have
some trouble explaining that.
- Is the issue of mixing GNU FDL content with by-sa content resolved?

or - as the author of a work I'd like to have a license that
- grants certain rights to the licensee. The by-sa does that job very well
- I don't like that others lock down the rights of licensee by DRM.
But I do want the licensee to use my work on a DRM-enabled device. My
work should be usable on a wide range of platforms and I don't want to
limit the licensees choice of platform (I don't like DRM - but common
sense suggests that we have to live with that in the future).
- as it currently stands, the creative common license draft is a no-go
for me due to the reasoning above.

so - why not consider that parallel distribution approach treating the
DRM-free-version similar to sourcecode in the GPLV2 and the
DRM-enabled version as binary? I don't get it.

Joerg Zastrau


[1] http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-October/004251.html
-- 
Jörg Zastrau
Buchenlochstraße 66a, App. A-14
67663 Kaiserslautern



More information about the cc-licenses mailing list