Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Francesco Poli <invernomuto AT paranoici.org>]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:06:02 +0000 Rob Myers 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.

That fact that DRM is unacceptable should encourage to introduce
non-free restrictions to fight against it.

> 
> > 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.

There have been countless discussions (on cc-licenses and on
debian-legal, and maybe elsewhere) which elaborate on the reasons why
forbidding all DRM (independently from the availability of unencumbered
copies in parallel) obstructs free redistribution and discriminates
against the users of some platforms.
I won't list all the possible mailing list messages or threads.
One example of explanation could be this one:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/10/msg00065.html


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
 New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

Attachment: pgpJdEsP4GZAf.pgp
Description: PGP signature