Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

Attempt to restate my ideas for a stronger copyleft for BY-SA 4.0+ in 
alternate language

I am doing this because once again, in a recent discussion or two, just as I 
felt we might be making progress towards clarifying what I am trying to get 
at, the discussion ended for no reason that I could discern.

See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

4. Restrictions. The license granted in Section 3 above is expressly made 
subject to and limited by the following restrictions:

a. ...
b. ...
c. ...
d. ...

Add e below:

e. You do not have any of the rights granted in 3 above if you have any legal 
means to restrict the Licensor's rights to deal with any resulting works in 
the manner in which you deal with them and do not license those rights freely 
to any and everyone. Or if anyone else has any legal means to restrict the 
Licensor's rights to deal with any resulting works in the manner in which 
they deal with them and do not license those rights freely to any and 
everyone.

Practically speaking, this means that any adaptations have to be BY-SA and 
and 
collections have to be Free works and all parts of collections have to be 
Free works as if they are not, you do not have a license to make the 
adaptations as per 1.a. or the copies needed for the collections nor the 
rights to incorporate them into said collections as per 1.b.

On a side note, 1.b. 

'"Collection" means a collection of literary or artistic works, such as 
encyclopedias and anthologies, or performances, phonograms or broadcasts, or 
other works or subject matter other than works listed in Section 1(f) below,'

but 1.f says:

'"Licensor" means the individual, individuals, entity or entities that 
offer(s) the Work under the terms of this License.'

What should 1.b be pointing to?

all the best,

drew