Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden AT twcny.rr.com>]

>On 21 May 2005, at 13:31, toddd at mypse.goracer.de wrote:
>> 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?
>
Rob Meyers wrote:
>Such a clause would be wide open to abuse.
Not if it was drafted properly.

>So for example, I have a song from iTunes Music store that has DRM on  
>it. I request a transparent version from the publisher. They tell me  
>that will cost twenty dollars to cover their costs. I send off the  
>money. Six weeks later I get a low-quality audio tape with the song on.

I am thinking of a clause like this:

If you distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally 
perform the Work with any technological measures that restrict the ability of 
recipients to exercise their rights regarding the work under law or this 
License Agreement, you must offer to simultaneously distribute to, publicly 
display to, publicly perform for, or publicly digitally perform for each 
recipient an equal or higher quality copy of the Work without such 
technological measures, at no charge.

Does that address your concerns?  :-)

I included a separate, independent change to attempt to improve phrasing.  
Debian has worried about the vagueness of the phrase "technological measures 
that control access or use of the Work in a manner inconsistent with this 
License Agreement".   How does "technological measures that restrict the 
ability of recipients to exercise their rights regarding the work under law 
or this License Agreement" sound?  I think that specifies exactly which 
technological measures we are trying to ban rather well: ones which restrict 
the ability of recipients to exercise their rights.  I included rights under 
law as well as rights under the License Agreement so that fair use would be 
included.  I believe "rights under this License Agreement" should include 
every permission granted to a recipient under the license, but a lawyer 
should verify that.