[cc-licenses] Clarification needed: parallel distribution

drew Roberts zotz at 100jamz.com
Fri Jan 27 19:19:33 EST 2012


On Friday 27 January 2012 16:27:58 Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:56:13 +0000 Rob Myers wrote:
> > On 13/01/12 18:40, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:06:02 +0000 Rob Myers wrote:
> > >> On 11/01/12 22:52, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > >>> The big question is: does the clause allow a licensee to distribute a
> > >>> TPM-encumbered form of the work, as long as he/she also make a clean
> > >>> (unencumbered) form available in parallel? If this parallel
> > >>
> > >> It does not and should not. DRM is unacceptable for software and it is
> > >> unacceptable for cultural works.
> > >
> > > That fact that DRM is unacceptable should encourage to introduce
> > > non-free restrictions to fight against it.
> >
> > We haven't established that prohibiting DRM is nonfree.
>
> I am convinced that some (excessive) forms of prohibition of DRM are
> non-free restrictions.

Can you give some examples of what you consider to be non-excessive and 
excessive prohibitions?

> I think that there are indeed ways to fight against DRM without
> introducing non-free restrictions. But forbidding all kinds of
> distribution of DRM-encumbered copies is a non-free restriction, IMHO.
>
> I think that allowing the distribution of DRM-encumbered with the
> parallel distribution of an unencumbered copy adequately fights against
> DRM and protects the recipients' freedom.

Not necessarily for that recipient who only has the box that is "DRM locked" 
surely. Or please explain.

Can the solution be to allow small scale DRM locked with parallel distribution 
for human beings while disallowing large scale DRM locked with parallel 
distribution for human beings and all DRM locked distribution by 
corporations? (I think parts of me hate making this distinction.)
>
> > However Debian appear to have established that it is free. BY-SA 3.0 was
> > declared DFSG-compatible.
>
> Yes, and I disagree with the Debian Project decision-makers on this
> point.
> Please remember that I am not speaking on behalf of the Debian Project.
> The opinions I express here are my own and my own only.

all the best,

drew


More information about the cc-licenses mailing list