Development of Creative Commons licenses

[toddd AT mypse.goracer.de]

> Secondly, your examples are rather construed in most cases. I would
> assume that CC licenses should be interpreted in the same manner as the
> GPL, where it is the recipients of the content who's rights to the
> material is to protected. The GPL and I assume all CC licenses doesn't
> imply that if you send the song to one person then you are suddenly
> legally required to send it to anyone in the world who wants it. So
> wether the content is distributed on a encrypted network or not doesn't
> matter as long as the person receiving the content on the encrypted
> network doesn't have her rights under the CC licensed diminished. So
> claiming that using a encrypted WiFi network would violate the clause is
> rather far fetched IMHO.

DRM distribution is to CC what binary distribution is to GPL. But the GPL does
not forbid binary distribution, it just forces you to make the source 
available. 
A similiar approach for CC and DRM might be helpfull?