"No derivative" Licenses

[s***@public.gmane.org]

I am interested in publishing some video tutorials and am trying to
decide upon a license. I basically want to allow for free sharing of
the videos as long as they are provided in unencumbered media formats
-- no transcoding to proprietary formats, and especially no
publication of proprietary-encoded versions by YouTube or other such
sites.

Neither the Creative Commons ND (no derivatives) nor SA (share alike)
licensing terms support my goal because they allow for transcoding of
the content to other, proprietary, formats (though they offer an
option to exclude the addition of TPM/DRM). I do not care if my
content is used commercially, or whether derivative works are based on
the content itself; however, I do care that it should be provided
using only unencumbered media formats (but otherwise freely
distributable).

I realize that I could create my own licensing terms, but I was
wondering if there might not already exist a license that generally
supports such terms. I would also welcome feedback on how such a
license might be approached (assuming one doesn't exist) plus any
general commentary on the viability or morality of such licensing
anyone wishes to provide.

Regards.

[Orton AKINCI aka .-_-.]

hi,

i had the same concern about my work being transcoded to proprietary formats even they are free (as in freedom). my solution is to state my own copyleft notice ...


.copyleft!_
.you are free to appropriate the related content as you wish, as long as you use a copyleft license to redistribute_
.however giving credits and choosing free/open formats are nice_

http://www.httpdot.net/copyleft_

you can see the explanation of the notice on the link above... this is not a license but just a notice. i think we don't need the mediation of any law (or anyone) to describe the way to share our creativity. it is all about moral issues, not law!. are you going to "sue" someone if they transcode your work? why do you need cc? didn't we have any "free" works available before cc?.


cc is not the only way for the free culture. check out the "free art license" ( http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/e ) which was issued before cc being royal to the terms of GNU GPL. libre commons ( http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/rt/printerFriendly/1403/1321) is also inspiring since it favours the moral issues instead of law... i appreciate the work of david berry and giles moss ( http://www.archive.org/details/LibreCultureMeditationsOnFreeCulture) . you can also check freedomdefined.org for a comparison of some licenses ( http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses )


besides the copyleft notice in my website i also state that

. all the content is copyleft!& available in free/open formats_
. this website runs entirely on the following free/open source software&standards_
Debian GNU/Linux | Apache | Php | MySQL | Wordpress | Swiss | Sandbox | ogg theora | ogg vorbis | html5 | GNU FreeFont | PNG | ODF


i think you can state your own copyleft notice if you are not planning to sue anyone :)


you can check out my projects at the link below if you like...


.-_-.


http://httpdot.net/.-_-./




________________________________
From: "playogg-discuss-request-***@public.gmane.org" <playogg-discuss-request-***@public.gmane.org>
To: playogg-discuss-***@public.gmane.org
Sent: Mon, April 26, 2010 7:03:04 PM
Subject: playogg-discuss Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 15:49:28 -0400
From: saulgoode-***@public.gmane.org
Subject: [playogg-discuss] "No derivative" Licenses
To: playogg-discuss-***@public.gmane.org
Message-ID:
<20100425154928.eitnh3168sc8s0gs-***@public.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
format="flowed"

I am interested in publishing some video tutorials and am trying to
decide upon a license. I basically want to allow for free sharing of
the videos as long as they are provided in unencumbered media formats
-- no transcoding to proprietary formats, and especially no
publication of proprietary-encoded versions by YouTube or other such
sites.

Neither the Creative Commons ND (no derivatives) nor SA (share alike)
licensing terms support my goal because they allow for transcoding of
the content to other, proprietary, formats (though they offer an
option to exclude the addition of TPM/DRM). I do not care if my
content is used commercially, or whether derivative works are based on
the content itself; however, I do care that it should be provided
using only unencumbered media formats (but otherwise freely
distributable).

I realize that I could create my own licensing terms, but I was
wondering if there might not already exist a license that generally
supports such terms. I would also welcome feedback on how such a
license might be approached (assuming one doesn't exist) plus any
general commentary on the viability or morality of such licensing
anyone wishes to provide.

Regards.





------------------------------

_______________________________________________
playogg-discuss mailing list
playogg-discuss-***@public.gmane.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/playogg-discuss


End of playogg-discuss Digest, Vol 12, Issue 1
**********************************************