Against DRM 2.0
This is very interesting:
"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."
There is not a clearly defined metric for determining if a measure is consistent with the terms of the license.
See this license:
"6. No DRM
This license is incompatible with any technology, device or component that, in the normal course of its operation, is designed to prevent or restrict acts which are authorised or not authorised by licensor: this incompatibility causes the inapplicability of the license to the work.
a. it is not possible to
release validly under this license works or derivative works whose access control mechanism and/or copy control mechanism prevent or restrict quantitatively and/or qualitatively access to, fruition, copy, modification and/or sharing of them;
b. in conformity with this license, it is not allowed to prevent or restrict quantitatively and/or qualitatively access to, fruition, copy, modification, and/or sharing of works or derivative works through an access control mechanism and/or a copy control mechanism;
c. in conformity with this license, it is not allowed to prevent or restrict the exercise of a granted right through any digital, analog or physical method."
"Access control mechanism: a technological measure which, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner or related rights owner,
to gain access to the work."
"Copy control mechanism: a technological measure which, in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of the copyright owner or related rights owner."
"Acts authorised by licensor: acts concerning granted rights (in particular, act of access, act of copy, act of modification, act of sharing)."
"Acts not authorised by licensor: acts concerning copyright or possible moral rights."
"In the absence of any other information, technologies enabling private distribution of the work would seem to be forbidden. Along with obvious technological measures that control access, such as a firewall on a LAN or a virtual private network (VPN), distributing using encryption (such as Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)) would appear to be
Real property, personal property, privacy, sale... : rights that the license does not treat.
License's area of applicability
"This license concerns copyright and related rights: this license does not treat any other right.
Nothing in this license is intended to prevent or restrict the exercise of rights not treated in this license, such as rights concerning privacy, private property, sale and other personal or private rights. Nothing in this license is intended to prevent or restrict the private use of any lawful technological measure
You keep all those rights.
You can limit the access to your server. It's your right.
You can use a firewall to defend your private property. It's your right.
You can use encryption to
defend your privacy or your private property. It's your right.
You can also use privately any lawful technological measure.
But, out of these cases, you cannot use encryption to prevent or restrict the exercise of a granted right.
For example, you can sell a CD (only purchasers can access to the content of a CD for sale: it's clear! you can use also an alarm system :-D), but you cannot sell a CD with a copy control system or an access control system.
But also the clause about related rights is very important:
for example, If a phonogram-maker produces a CD with songs released under Against DRM 2.0, you can grab and share the CD!
This is not allowed by any other license.
I think that "Against DRM 2.0" is better than Creative Commons licenses.
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.