Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org>]

As I said, I think we've been looking at this all wrong:

* Can DRM be applied to CC work?

According to Mia Garlick, to one third party who has spoken to CC 
(referred to via MJ Ray's weblog), and by a close reading of the 
license, yes. As long as that DRM does not remove any rights the license 
gives the user.

* Can CC work be distributed with DRM added?

Again yes, with the same proviso.

* Who has the right to add DRM to CC work?

According to Mia’s responses to the draft comments, possibly only the 
copyright holder(s?). This would mean that only the original author and 
possibly authors of derivative works could add DRM. End users would not 
be able to.

* What about Fair Use?

The CC licenses state that nothing in them is intended to reduce Fair 
Use. But adding DRM has the potential to reduce Fair Use in unintended 
ways. Any addition of DRM therefore has at least the potential to reduce 
Fair Use. This might mean that no DRM can be added, as any DRM removes 
the Fair Use rights guaranteed (although not granted) by the license.

* What about noncommercial copying?

All the licenses allow at the very least noncommercial copying of 
unmodified work. DRM can be used to prevent this. But is this a right 
guaranteed by the license or merely a permission offered by it?

* What does this mean for dual distribution?

Ironically, given the terms of this debate, it means that it may mean 
that the novel element of dual distribution would be the requirement to 
provide a transparent, non-DRM copy!

* Should a transparent copy clause be added?

Dual distribution or transparent copy clauses for cultural works do not 
sit well with CC’s style of remix culture licensing. It would be very 
difficult to get right. We would need to look at the FDL/SFDL, which 
have a similar requirement.

- Rob.