Development of Creative Commons licenses

["Greg London" <email AT greglondon.com>]

> Larry Lerner is technologically impaired. He likes to listen to some
> by-sa licensed audio on his DRM-enabled device. He has a personal key
> that allows him to sign off non-DRM work and use it on his device. He
> relies on me as a friend that I download the work on his device as he
> has no clue how to do it himself.

I think that the thing to keep in mind here is
that people who distribute FLOSS works will
not look at this as an opportunity for a
frivolous lawsuit.

Even if this somehow violated the proposed CC license,
even if this somehow did not make the legal qualifications
for a "local copy" which the CC license does allow TPM
to be applied, I can't see anyone whose priority is
the FLOSS community to actually pursue this as a license
violation.

Were you to apply this example to one of my
works, I would not consider it as attempting
to create a proprietary fork by taking advantage
of a platform monopoly. I would not attempt to
stop you from doing this.  And while that's just
one contributer's opinion, I think that the same
principle is inherent in all FLOSS contributers,
to keep the work free is the priority, not to
be concerned about someone who's applying
DRM to local content to play on hardware they own.

The concern is to protect the work from
monopolization. And your scenario is not about
monopolization.  I mean, maybe someone -would-
pursue this as a license violation, but I think
you would see a lot of the true FLOSS community
coming to your defense, creating works that
were available to do this, and putting out as
much bad-mojo about the guy trying to take you
to court as possible.

-- 
Take the Courage Vow
http://www.couragevow.com/
Pass it on.