On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 03:15:25PM -0400, Evan Prodromou wrote: > You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or > publicly digitally perform the Work with any technological > measures that control access or use of the Work in a manner > inconsistent with the terms of this License Agreement. > > I know that the anti-DRM clause in the GFDL was a cause of problems. I'm > worried that this loosely-phrased clause may be one, too. Yes, this is nasty for most of the same reasons as the GFDL clause. It says that I may not send you the file via Apple's DRM-controlled iTunes service, even though I also offer it to you directly (on my vastly slower server). Or any other example where you have the option of providing it on both restricted and unrestricted media, and for whatever reason, the restricted media is usually preferred. The clause is basically backwards. It should say that you must provide it *without* "any technological measures (...)" (but you may also provide it with them), which is roughly what the GPL says. That's disregarding the vagueness. As usual the GPL said it better. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature