Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Parker Higgins <parkerhiggins AT gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Poli <invernomuto AT paranoici.org> wrote:

[...]

I think this is very awkward: you *can* distribute CC-by-sa-licensed
material in a format that hampers modifications (while keeping your
preferred form for modification for yourself), but you *cannot*
absolutely apply even the weakest form of DRM, not even if you make
DRM-unencumbered copies available in parallel!

I acknowledge that DRM is worse than source secrecy, but anyway, what I
described above looks like a sort of self-contradiction...

I don't know if there's any real legal basis to this, but these two ideas don't seem contradictory to me. DRM is the addition of an undesirable feature (an anti-feature, to use the nomenclature), where source secrecy is just the lack of a desirable feature. 

Of course there are as well jurisdictions in which breaking "even the weakest form of DRM" is illegal, but nowhere is it illegal to use a less preferred form for modification.

Parker

-- 
parker higgins
san francisco, ca

http://parkerhiggins.net

gmail / gchat: parkerhiggins AT gmail.com

twitter / identi.ca: @thisisparker
skype: thisisparker

please consider software freedom before reading this e-mail on a proprietary platform