Evan Prodromou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > My opinion is based on the contribution of debian-legal participants, of > the workgroup participants, and of my own review of the licenses.
I don't doubt that. However, that's still your opinion rather than the Workgroup's. I don't mean anything bad by that. Just a correction to what was written. > [...] I also believe that a large number of debian-legal > participants have said that the DRM clause, as it stands, is free enough > to allow distribution under DRM if such DRM is not "effective" [...] I'm now sufficiently confused by CC/DRM/DReaM and others that I would advise everyone to run away, run away from that lawyerbomb. I seem to remember that RMS also advised people to avoid promoting CC until they sort out what the devil they stand for. Until we see a few of the anti-TPM zealots try to use CC to punish parallel distribution, we probably won't know what the current licence means in practical terms. Hope that explains, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
