Some of the wording here is of an interesting choice. This is applicable to
free distributions though and I think it is still unclear how it applies to
say a single commercially produced song or a game.
If you look at a non-function book for instance like Free Software Free
Society the copyright gives permission to copy verbatim although not make
modifications. One might think this violates ones freedom. The reason behind
this is it is non-functional and because it is a political piece/opinion/etc.
I don't know if this copying is allowed for both commercial and
non-commercial purposes as the page didn't print correctly and half the
copyright notice is cut off for me. It is probably commercial or
non-commercial distribution though.
In any case I just thought I'd point this out. It never occurred to me that
DRM-free content might require a non-restrictive license to be considered
freedom friendly. However I could see such a requirement existing. The
question then becomes is purchasing "non-free" (not commercially
re-distributable although ok to loan a copy of to a friend for instance, as
is the case for most books, be ok) non-functional content ok.
