Cc-uk mailing list

[Dan Brickley <danbri AT w3.org>]

J. Grant wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> [...]
>
>> To me you're implying that CC has an obligation to use open file 
>> formats. Why?
>>
>> I'm a believer in open file formats for many, many reasons but I see 
>> CC as being a broad church which is using a simple legal approach to 
>> copyright reform. To me that is the goal, and while I think it's be 
>> great if CC could use open formats, I don't think it should be 
>> limited to doing so if it's not the most effective way of using its 
>> limited resources.
>
>
> Do you think it is acceptable to only provide content in a form which
> ensures that the user is obliged to also use a particular software
> package / authoritarian licence? (Proprietary or otherwise, only
> available
> at cost or otherwise)
>
>> That's what I took from the original e-mail, a worry (which I share) 
>> that FSF freedom advocates will increasingly argue that CC MUST act 
>> in ways corresponding to principles which they hold but which are
>> not  core to the specific project. That narrows the church
>> considerably  and doesn't help with outreach to many companies whose
>> help will be  required to make CC a further success. An example might
>> be if Apple  added CC support to Quicktime 8 and wanted  CC to
>> present some CC- advertising in that format to drive adoption of
>> Quicktime 8. To my  mind that would be entirely consistent with CCs
>> mission and past  approach but which might be opposed by FSF style
>> purists.
>
>
> In my view it would be better if Free Culture made full use of Free
> Software. However, providing the Culture is accessible it does not
> necessarily have to be created with Proprietary or FS, or viewed on
> Proprietary or FS.

IMHO the missing link here is open standards. I don't care if
I'm using non-Free software, so long as the core data structures
are based on open standards that let me switch to alternate
software whenever I care to....

Dan