Development of Creative Commons licenses

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

>>> I think that this may be an essential point of our disagreement.
>>> You are most concerned that everyone have identical freedoms in
>>> a ShareAlike work.
>>
>> Yes. And why do you think that it is important?
>>
>> Hint: it isn't because I want to use cc licenses as a "weapon".
>>
>> Why would I think it is important?
>>
>> Hint: it isn't "just because" either.
>>
>> Get this question right and maybe this conversation will
>> make some progress.
>
> (skipping this question because it is rhetorical)

No. It wasn't. You have yet to grasp why I support
an anti-DRM clause and oppose a parallel-distribution clause.
Or at the very least, I haven't heard it said back to
me properly yet.

It seems every time my position is restated by folks
in favor of Parallel-Distribution it always comes out
with some assinine mention that I'm going it to
"drive a stake into the heart of DRM".

I understand why you support Parallel distribution.
Here's your choices:

anti-tpm:

prevents Alice/Bob from listening to CC-SA songs
on DRM-Dave's DRM-only hardware platform,
even if Dave were to want to do it.

Punishment to Alice/Bob: minus 10


parallel distribution:

allows Alice/Bob to listen to CC-SA songs on
DRM-Dave's DRM-only hardware platform if DRM-Dave
will apply DRM to the CC-SA content.

bonus to Alice/Bob: Plus 10




Here's my piece of it. The piece you keep missing.
Anti-TPM:

Prohibits DRM-Dave from monopolizing the entire CC-SA
works on his hardware. CC-SA works can only be distributed
to non-monopolistic hardware. This means that the
community will not see their creations used by Alice and Bob
on Dave's DRM-only platform, but they will still see their
works used on any platform that can use non-DRM content.

Damage to community: minus 10



parallel distribution:

allows DRM Dave to monopolize the entire CC-SA works.
Entire FLOSS community might see their works on
Dave's hardware with Dave using DRM and DMCA to
charge money to get a copy that plays on his DRM-only
player. But no one in the FLOSS community who created
any of those works will be able to sell their own
versions of DRM-enabled works that play on Dave's hardware.

Damage to community: minus 10 times size of community.
Say, negative several hundred.


Until you get that its not a rhetorical question, I'm done.

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