Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] Two Part ParDist is same as AntiTPM

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: James Grimmelmann <james AT grimmelmann.net>
  • To: Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Two Part ParDist is same as AntiTPM
  • Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2006 19:08:28 -0500

Greg London wrote:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-licenses/2006-December/004634.html

Use of DRM on a redistributed CC work is okay ONLY IF:
1) The work is also made available in an unDRMed parallel version, and
2) Everyone is free to apply the DRM.

I would moderately prefer the straightforward parallel distribution
clause to this one. I would much prefer this version to a license
without a parallel distribution. (And I would consider a license
without an anti-DRM clause at all unacceptable.)

Now I'm totally confused.

2) Everyone is free to apply the DRM.

This can only occur if DRM-Dave gives everyone permission to
apply DRM to the content that he provided.

If DRM-Dave is willing to do this, then he isn't trying to
monopolize his platform, and his platform should support
either transparent DRM (DRM that simply tells the platform
to place no restrictions on the work) or open format content
(text files, jpgs, mpegs files, etc.) and then it won't be
a problem anyway.

It is easily possible to envision platforms that that use DRM but do not support transparent DRM or open format content. These platforms are driven more by (non-CC) copyright holders' desires to lock up their works than by a desire for platform monopoly. Both are legitimate concerns.

Also, the anti-TPM clause as it is currently proposed
allows local application of DRM to CC-SA works.
This means if Dave allows (2), then you can apply
DRM to your local CC-SA copy and load it to your platform
under the current proposed language for the license.
>

The only restriction with the Anti-TPM clause is
that you cannot distribute that DRM version if
that version has restricted rights.

But you can use it locally on your hardware platform.

The only thing you don't get out of the current
anti-TPM clause is a parallel distribution copy.

But if Dave is willing to allow people to apply DRM,
then it isn't a problem. You just do it to your local copy.

Yes?


Much would depend on how easy it is to apply the DRM. If it were expensive or difficult, this might not be a reasonable option. One could fix that by amending (2) to read, "Everyone is free and reasonably able to apply the DRM for free." But that, as I believe is pointed out later in this thread, complicates (2) even further. It may be that the best argument against this compromise is that precise language would be too complicated or too difficult to draft.

James




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page