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

Re: CC Non-waivable Compulsory License Scheme

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:43:19 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:19:35PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:39:49 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> > [...]
> > > excellent explanation!
> > In other words, IIUC, this clause seems to try and limit the harms
> > done by some idiotic laws.
> > The license would *not* be *less* restrictive without this clause.
> > Is that correct?
> Yes, that's correct.  Without this clause, laws would still exist that
> would empower certain groups to collect royalties on behalf of
> copyright holders for certain uses of works.

Good.  As a consequence, I hereby state that I don't consider the
Non-waivable Compulsory License Schemes clause as an issue anymore.
That is to say: I am *no* longer worried by clause 3e(i) of
CC-by-sa-v3.0/unported and CC-by-v3.0/unported licenses.

I am still worried by absurd laws, but that's a completely different
beast (we should not blame licenses for that).

I am still concerned by the other CC-v3.0 issues listed in my analyses:
Is anyone willing to kill another concern of mine (by following the
constructive discussion approach, please)?

Final disclaimers, as usual: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.

 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpQq6SSopPIl.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: