Development of Creative Commons licenses

[rob AT robmyers.org]

Quoting Nic Suzor <nic AT suzor.com>:

> 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.

Cinemas do not use DRM, it is possible to make CSS-free DVDs, and there are
videos on iTMS without FairPlay. So I do not think that the anti-TPM language
in the CC licenses would prevent this.

We could all make more money if we disregarded our ethics. That does not make
disregarding our ethics the right thing to do.

> 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.

Lucas can say what he likes but the CC license is the entire agreement. And
saying is not doing. :-)

> 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.

This would be if the movie counts as a collective work.

> 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.

The "hum vote" has been widely criticised for being a bit geeky. ;-)

- Rob.