Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-licenses - Re: [cc-licenses] (no subject)

cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Nic Suzor" <nic AT suzor.com>
  • To: "Greg London" <email AT greglondon.com>, "Discussion on the Creative Commons license drafts" <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] (no subject)
  • Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 13:38:50 +1000

On 12/5/06, Greg London <email AT greglondon.com> wrote:
There is no way a CC-SA movie will ever be
released in the current environment of the
movie industry.

The day that a CC licensed movie approaches a deal to get a wide
release, I don't want a flat-out prohibition on DRM stopping that.
Cafune, Elephants Dream, Swarm of Angels, Sanctuary, to name but a
few; there's a growing number of high quality CC-licensed films being
produced.

There is no difference between the Lucas scenario
above and DRM-Dave's hardware, other than semantics.

The scenario you have constructed is a straw man. In your scenario, If
someone (Lucas) says that they'll make the all modifications
(derivative works) available under BY-SA, then that's complying with
the licence. The community benefits from the work done by others to
BY-SA-licensed works.

If Lucas took CC-licensed works, otherwise complied with the licence
by releasing the movie (or his modifications of the cc-licensed works,
if they are separable from the rest of the movie and the entire movie
is not required to be released under the licence), and he needed to
apply a TPM in order to get it distributed, fine.

(note - I don't like this strict interpretation - I think that
significant use of a BY-SA-licensed work as part of a movie would
require the entire movie to be released under BY-SA, not just
modifications to that work).

You want to vote that with your wallet, go for it.
Put a dual license on your content.
[...]
Just keep your hands the COMMUNITY's wallet
while you're doing it.

If it is the case that the 'community' really doesn't want to allow
DRM like this, then I can accept that. I will begin to dual license or
re-license my works.

The reason I'm still arguing this point is because I haven't seen a
consensus. We saw an informal 'hum vote' at the iCommons summit in
Brazil. I was just trying to have my point of view noted and counted.

I would prefer not to have to dual-licence my works. I am afraid of
the growing problems associated with licence proliferation and
incompatibility. I definitely don't want to have to roll my own
licence. If I have to, I will, but I thought that the discussion on
this list could be a constructive way of analysing the arguments and
coming to a sensible decision.

Again, I'm not trying to speak for anyone else. I just wanted to
participate in the drafting review process.

kind regards,

nic.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page