Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Friday 11 August 2006 12:24 pm, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-08 at 17:02 +0100, rob AT robmyers.org wrote:
> > As long as people can get access to the other format version, they  can
> > recover
> > their freedom, this is true.
>
> Great. I'm glad you grok that.
>
> > But this supports DRM, pushes access to freedom
> > away from the very devices we're pleading for DRM in the name of, and
> > we'd better hope that archive.org doesn't run out of money any time soon.
>
> I don't think it "supports" DRM. It makes a realistic accommodation that
> allows people who are using DRM-required hardware and software platforms
> to participate in some small way in the Free Culture movement, without
> taking away their rights to copy, modify, and distribute.
>
> Creative Commons is not dogmatic; it is pragmatic. That's why we have
> NC, ND, Sampling, and what-have-you licenses. 

Along that line, perhaps BY-SA should have anti-DRM provisions and something 
like BY or BY-NC should not? I certainly do not feel the need to in any way 
support proponents of DRM with the works I release as BY-SA.

> Forbidding thousands or 
> millions of people from experiencing Open Content because they bought
> the wrong computer or the wrong music player doesn't help creators,
> listeners, or the Free Culture movement.
>
> ~Evan

all the best,

drew
-- 
(da idea man)
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/145261
Record a song and you might win $1,000.00
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145