On 9/27/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the CC licenses don't require distribution of the preferred
> form for making modification aka. source code, it is essential that
> downstream recipient can extract works for modification and
> redistribution without violating any law that protects TPM. I think
> that it makes sense for CC licenses to have anti-TPM language and I
> don't think that anti-TPM language should make a license non-free.
Should we accept as free software a program under a licence which does
not allow licensees to distribute compiled files?
The correct way to fix this is for CC to require source code, not
prohibit compiled code.
I don't understand this. How CC probihits compiled code?
--
Markus Laire
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
