On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 09:49:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:29:32AM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote: > > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I don't see what's unclear, ambiguous, or inefficient about saying "the > > > recipient and all third parties". > > ^ > > "in posesion of the (modified) software", right? > > > > Otherwise it can sound like "source must be available to everybody" > > again. > > Yes, your correction seems apropos. > > So, my proposal for the wording of this clause is: > > Each time you distribute the Document (or any work based on the > Document), you grant to the recipient and all third parties > in possession of the Document the authority to gain access to the > work by descrambling the work if it is scrambled, decrypting the > work if it is encrypted, and otherwise avoiding, bypassing, > removing, deactivating, or impairing any and all technological > measures effectively controlling access to the work. >
I think it is still too widely scoped. If I place a copy of the document in a gpg encrypted e-mail along with something not for public consumption, all the ISPs on the way are in possession of a copy. This clause allows them to crack it open. There are similar situations with other forms of storage. Also even in the intended case of allowing people to decode CSS like protection on a copy, the clause may make the whole document non-distributable due to a conflicting obligation to obey a DMCA-like law. A better solution would be to define as an opaque form any format which prevents exercising the rights granted by the license, whether that prevention is a deliberate technological measure (such as CSS or SCMS) or an incidental fact of a format, such as the lack of free tools (example: MS Word before AbiWord became available), a hard-to-edit form (such as a bitmap depicting the document as it would be printed), a non-editable medium (such as printed paper) or any other reason. Combined with the obligation to provide recipients with a transparent copy, this would preserve the recipients rights without an unnecessary conflict with protection mechanisms backed by big powerful organizations. Just trying to be constructive and helpful Jakob -- This message is hastily written, please ignore any unpleasant wordings, do not consider it a binding commitment, even if its phrasing may indicate so. Its contents may be deliberately or accidentally untrue. Trademarks and other things belong to their owners, if any.
