Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] PROCEDURAL SUGGESTION

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • 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] PROCEDURAL SUGGESTION
  • Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 21:53:29 -0400

On Tuesday 03 October 2006 09:06 pm, Terry Hancock wrote:
> drew Roberts wrote:
> > DRM-Dave could provide the service of applying DRM at not cost to
> > FREE works while charging to do so for non-FREE works. This would
> > allow Dave to sell FREE works for his DRM only platform while
> > conducting business as usual with respect to non-Free works.
>
> This is not an unreasonable idea. It strikes me as fair in principle.
> But I don't think it's so easy in practice.
>
> The problem I see with it is that it seems like it would be very hard to
> sell the idea to a TPM/DRM provider. OTOH, I can imagine a company like
> Sony (which is currently trying to win hearts by running Linux on
> Playstation 3) offering a service on terms like this for the goodwill
> value. The biggest problem might be the guarantee to maintain this
> service in the future (e.g. for how long?). Remember, we're not talking
> about something DRM-Dave *can* do, we're talking about something he
> *must* do.
>
> One possibility is that he must maintain such a service for X years
> after the last time that he provides the DRM'd work.

As long as he wants to have the rights to distribute the licensed works with
TPM applied?
>
> Or he might publish the key, rendering the DRM ineffective/transparent
> (this might be a good platform-retirement option).

This might be an important line of thinking to explore.
>
> However, this is obviously a pretty complex requirement to draft, and
> the relative lack of any DRM provider who'd want it seems to make it a
> lot of work for little gain.
>
> Of course, the biggest question here is why is this more attractive to
> the TPM platform owner than just allowing their platform to play free,
> non-TPM content? (Which we'd prefer anyway).

I thought I answered this when I pointed out that the platform owner could
still have sort of monopoly position when it came to non-Free works. He could
still charge his rent for those works. If he allowed the platform to play
non-DRM works, he could not charge this rent from anyone.

Please note, I am not saying I like this situation. I am meerly exploring
possibilities.
>
> Cheers,
> Terry

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




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page