cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses
- From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
- To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses
- Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 20:51:05 -0400
On Saturday 30 September 2006 08:24 pm, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-29-09 at 00:30 -0500, Terry Hancock wrote:
> > After reading it, I find I'm compelled to agree with your platform
> > monopoly case. It is a "deal breaker" after all.
>
> I hope someone can explain to me why it's a deal-breaker. Nobody, as far
> as I know, has a monopoly on any of the different types of works --
> audio, images, video, text, or other forms of data. If a work is
> available to copy and run on another platform -- say, another music
> player or another kind of video disk -- but not on the distributor's, it
> will be a huge market pressure on the distributor.
>
> Imagine, if you will, DRM Dave's Web site, with a section for
> unencumbered works that can be either played as-is or easily converted
> to play on _many_other_ platforms _but_not_his_own_. In other words,
> he's hosting files for Works that his customers can't play. His market
> advantage over his competitors is nil -- in fact, he's got a
> disadvantage, since people can _play_ all the CC-SA music available on
> his platform somewhere else, _and_do_more_with_it_too_.
But all of the non-CC works on his site are unavailable anywhere else and can
only play on his player. And those ones are way more popular than the CC
ones.
>
> Why is this sad-sack figure with the bullet-hole through his foot an
> unacceptable threat to our Freedom?
Sort of like MS can't play ogg files out of the box? And why should that be?
(You have to squint just right to see this point.)
Evan,
do you really not see where this can go? (I will be generous and assume you
don't.)
1. Network effects.
2. Volume cost reduction effects.
3. Laws.
4. Corporate mergers / monopolies.
5. Patents / monopolies.
6. All the big copyright holders insist that they will only license content
to
play on players that only play "protected" files and refuse to play
non-protected files.
I feel like I could go on and on.
>
> ~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
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses
, (continued)
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Evan Prodromou, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/29/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Terry Hancock, 09/29/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Evan Prodromou, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Evan Prodromou, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Evan Prodromou, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Greg London, 09/30/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/28/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/27/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Rob Myers, 09/27/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/27/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, Rob Myers, 09/27/2006
- Re: [cc-licenses] Subject: Re: Version 3.0 - List Discussion Responses, drew Roberts, 09/27/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.