[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Freeness of anti-DRM

Henri Sivonen wrote:
Of course you know that the anti-DRM
clause makes the license incompatible with the DFSG, right?

Do they necessarily or just the ones so far proposed?
No, I think that parallel distribution (you can only distribute DRM'd works if you also distribute editable and modifiable versions) is a fair and workable anti-DRM clause that's compatible with the DFSG. That's what the CC 3.0 licenses will have in them, AFAIK.
I wrote an essay about it earlier this week, and I think there can be free anti-DRM clauses:
I actually saw your essay before you posted this (vanity searches are my secret vice). I thought you made a number of good points, but your use of emotionally-loaded words such as "DRM-infected" made it hard to take seriously. (I don't think infection is even a good metaphor for DRM.) However, I've got an essay that's partially a response on my site:


I think the premise of using free licenses to prevent DRM systems from being implemented gravely overestimates the influence of Free Software and Open Content.


Reply to: