On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:05:56 +0200 Francesco Poli wrote: > This is the CCv3draft0808060 anti-DRM clause, as quoted by Evan: > > | You may not impose any technological measures on the Work that > | restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to > | exercise the rights granted to them under the License.
While analyzing the license draft, I noted something strange. The anti-DRM clause quoted by Evan is, substantially, the one found in clause 4(a): | You may not impose any technological measures on the Work that | restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to | exercise their rights granted under the License. There's another one in clause 4(b), which is very similar, but not equal: | You may not impose any effective technological measures on the | Adaptation that restrict the ability of a recipient of the | Adaptation from You to exercise their rights granted under the | License. Please note the adjective "effective"! Questions: A) Why are these two clauses different from one another? B) Is the difference relevant with respect to DFSG compliance? C) Does specifying that only *effective* technological measures are forbidden imply that parallel distribution (of DRM-encumbered and DRM-*un*encumbered copies) is allowed for Adaptations? -- But it is also tradition that times *must* and always do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_ ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Description: PGP signature