[cc-licenses] license draft usage scenario questions

Jörg Zastrau dl1bku at gmail.com
Sun Oct 29 08:20:04 EST 2006

Thank you guys for the clarifications. It seems that I got the answers
on the issues I raised. To sum it up:

- license compatibility
>>> [me]
>>> - Is the issue of mixing GNU FDL content with by-sa content resolved?
>> [Henri Sivonen]
>> No. You can have them side by side on the same audio device. [..]
In this usage case I'll have to make sure I work with "citations" or
get permissions from upstream in the case that I distribute the
resulting work widely - ok - So there is still an issue which license
to choose for my derivative (bummer). I would be surprised if I could
get one of the original authors to re license his work 8-(

- personal DRM usage
> [Rob]
> For the Garmin example, there are other GPS systems available and these
> would be a better choice if Garmin went DRM
This is political - If the licensee actually decides it is o.k. for
him to purchase a key from the manufacturer to use his data on the
device - i couldn't care less except maybe feeling pity for this

>>> [me]
>>> - 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.
>> [drew]
>> I don't think anything is actually preventing this solution.
>>Can you explain the problem/objection  you see in more detail?
>> [drew]
>>[,,] One where those in possessoin of the device can apply the DRM
to home-grown
> [Rob]
>IIRC the current wording of the 3.0 licence appears to allow personal
>addition of DRM.
This is what I actually misunderstood. I thought that the anti-DRM/TPM
clause prohibits any use of such method for distribution (some debian
page stated that copying the work using ssl encryption is not
possible) . Most of my concerns are invalidated if DRM/TPM it is
allowed for "private distribution".

- vendor control
>>> [me]
>>> [..] so - why not consider that parallel distribution approach [..]
>> [drew]
>> Some of us have considered it and don't want it when it allows
devices without
>> the ability to play home-grown content to use our BY-SA works.
So the (largely political) position is to close all loopholes in the
CC licenses regarding tivoization-like attempts (at the expense of a
more impractical approach to distribute files for the devices in
question). ok.

thank you again for your time. Your answers help me a lot to make up my mind.

Joerg Zastrau

Jörg Zastrau
Buchenlochstraße 66a, App. A-14
67663 Kaiserslautern

More information about the cc-licenses mailing list