[freeroleplay] Re: Descriptive vs. Proscriptive, frpgc.org vs. freeroleplay.org

  • From: Ricardo Gladwell <president@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: freeroleplay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:24:38 +0100

Per I. Mathisen wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Mark Havenner wrote: 
In any case,I see your point. I know there is a great deal of controversy
over not being permitted to access raw text from 'open content' games by
locking pdfs so they can't even be used under fair use policies.
You'd be right there, the CC doesn't address thatat all.


Not entirely correct. CC-BY-SA 2.5 has this in point 4a:

  ...
  You may not distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly
  digitally perform the Work with any technological measures that control
  access or use of the Work in a manner inconsistent with the terms of
  this License Agreement.
  ...

I interpret this as a clear rejection of locked PDFs which make you unable
to practically satisfy the share-alike requirements of the license.

I would agree that this is a clear rejection of locked PDFs, Per, but I would also add that "technological measures that control access or use of the Work" is a little vague. What about technical measures that do not control access or use of the work, but that incidentally restrict the ability to modify the document. For example, distributing text as images only or as hard-copy only?

IMHO, this is not equivalent to a source requirement and the people on the CC mailing list would seem to vigorously agreed with me here when I put the same point to them (even though they vigorously disagreed with me on everything else :)

Kind regards...

--
Ricardo Gladwell
President, Free Roleplaying Community
http://www.freeroleplay.org/
president@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. freeroleplay
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2005