Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Tim Cas <darkuranium AT gmail.com>]

...I can't believe I didn't see this email...

I've posted about the exact same thing.

Anyways, read my other post here - the problem isn't only DRM (which I agree, I am strongly against DRM), but proprietary formats in general, which may be a sensible choice in many cases (they may be more efficient - space or CPU-wise or they may indeed be the only reasonable choice on a certain platform).

As I said in the other post, think about it -- if the authors didn't want their content posted in proprietary formats, wouldn't they have picked a -SA license? I am pretty sure that most authors who release their work under CC-BY (or other non-SA and possibly non-NC licenses) do not know about this restriction.

I myself have released some work under CC-BY and variants, and had I known about this, I would have picked a different license.

If you do keep this requirement, you should add it to the "Under the following conditions" section.

On 12 January 2012 00:06, Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> wrote:

On 11/01/12 22:52, Francesco Poli wrote:
> The big question is: does the clause allow a licensee to distribute a
> TPM-encumbered form of the work, as long as he/she also make a clean
> (unencumbered) form available in parallel? If this parallel

It does not and should not. DRM is unacceptable for software and it is
unacceptable for cultural works.

> distribution scenario is indeed allowed, then I've seen no one
> objecting to the freeness of the anti-TPM clause: everyone says that
> the clause meets the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG). If instead
> the clause forbids parallel distribution, many people (including me)
> think it fails to meet the DFSG.

On what basis? The DFSG clearly need revising to remove the possibility
of this confusion.

- Rob.
_______________________________________________
List info and archives at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses
Unsubscribe at http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/cc-licenses

In consideration of people subscribed to this list to participate
in the CC licenses http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0 development
process, please direct unrelated discussions to the cc-community list
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community