Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam AT benfinney.id.au>]

Rob Myers <rob AT robmyers.org> writes:

> To the extent that the licensed work cannot have DRM applied,

That's the change being asked for: to remove that prohibition.

> there can be no parallel distribution of the licensed work, surely?

Yes. So the desire is to allow parallel distribution of DRM-encumbered
forms – “parallel” because they must only exist as an option beside the
primary DRM-free forms.

With parallel distribution permitted, regrdless of whether a
DRM-encumbered for is distributed, the work must be available DRM-free
to any recipient who chooses it, and recipients must be notified that
this is available to them.

In other words, it is preferable that distributors may choose to make
*additional* dorms, even DRM-encumbered forms, available in parallel, so
long as every recipient can choose a DRM-free form and is made aware
they have that choice.

> The licensor of any original work can offer that work under any terms
> they like, the license cannot prevent them distributing the work
> non-CC with DRM attached.

Right. The work, though, is still under the same license no matter what
medium it's on, even if DRM is applied.

> So what change is being suggested here? :-)

To allow distribution of DRM-encumbered forms, while requiring that the
work is always available to any recipient in a DRM-free form and that
recipients be notified of that option.

That's my understanding of what is being asked for, anyway.

-- 
 \     “As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of |
  `\                                       the demand.” —Josh Billings |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney