CC Non-waivable Compulsory License Scheme (was: Anti-TPM clauses)

2007-09-13 Thread jonathon
Francesco wrote: > DVDs, ...), why does the clause included in CC-v3.0 licenses talk about > the right to collect royalties "for any exercise by You of the rights > granted under this License" ? That refers to collecting societies that have both a legal monopoly, and legal mandate to collect roya

Re: CC Non-waivable Compulsory License Scheme (was: Anti-TPM clauses)

2007-09-13 Thread Matthew Johnson
Francesco Poli wrote: > On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:06:12 +0200 Freek Dijkstra wrote: > > So it seems to me that CC does not make any more limitations or > > restrictions then those that are already there in the law (e.g. the > > restriction "you can only buy blank CDs and DVDs if you pay a fee"). > > S

Re: CC Non-waivable Compulsory License Scheme (was: Anti-TPM clauses)

2007-09-13 Thread Francesco Poli
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:06:12 +0200 Freek Dijkstra wrote: [...] > Francesco, > [one constructive answer to one of my concerns, at last!] > > So it seems to me that CC does not make any more limitations or > restrictions then those that are already there in the law (e.g. the > restriction "you can o

Re: CC Non-waivable Compulsory License Scheme (was: Anti-TPM clauses)

2007-09-13 Thread Freek Dijkstra
Francesco Poli wrote: > Well, I made a detailed analysis of the issues I see in CC-by(-sa)-v3.0 > licenses. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/msg00124.html > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/03/msg00105.html > Just saying that they are "in spirit the same as GPL" is *not* a >