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: melanie dulong de rosnay <melanie.dulong-de-rosnay AT cersa.org>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] PROCEDURAL SUGGESTION
  • Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 17:38:11 +0200

hi all,

at CC France we don't need to have this debate closed today and i agree with Tom that people who don't agree with the amended anti-TPM clause should be able to continue to discuss until hopefully some kind of consensus or the strong feeling that consensus will not be reached now (within a few days/weeks).

i do agree with the anti-TPM clause so that CC granted rights are not restricted, i don't see why the additional transaction cost to negotiate an authorization to wrap CC content in DRM could not be carried by those who already carry the cost of developing a business.

and yes Paul and others it is impossible to follow all the exchanges & arguments, so would the other people please send, when they feel the discussion is close to an end, maybe with an new object title, a *shorter* summary of the DRMDave et al use cases explaining why which use cases could be prevented by the anti-TPM clause, because it is too complicated for me to understand without reading posts at least twice and maybe therefore further discussion in longer posts is needed by the people who really understand these use cases.
i think i did understand one argument proposing to remove the anti- TPM clause in BY or non NC licenses because licensors using BY may be ok with almost anything but we're not sure of this and we should tend to keep the system uniform for all options.

thanks, melanie

Le 4 oct. 06 à 16:48, Patrick Peiffer a écrit :

because parallel distribution
- is too complex in practice
- has only esoteric use cases at the moment,
and:
- the non-exclusive nature of CC allows for nearly every possible way
out of this for licensors anyway, including DRM,
- we don't like to see TPMs restricting CC given rights,
- we're pragmatic and it's only v3.0...

...BUT we really want to port this 3.0 nationally for 2007, so for all
practical purposes of this public discussion, we consider the TPM
question resolved.

regards, patrick, cc-lu
_______________________________________________
cc-licenses mailing list
cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page