[cc-community] CC or GPL source code that creates art
Rob Myers
rob at robmyers.org
Wed Mar 18 05:47:14 EDT 2009
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Tom Sparks <tom_a_sparks at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> what about from the art angle?
> turtle graphics can create paper-based and digital art?
Executable code should be GPL.
Structured data that represents an artwork should be BY-SA.
For PostScript or Logo or Context Free or Processing, which are
programming languages that render images, the program listing should
be GPL and the resultant image should be BY-SA. *BUT* the *output* of
a program cannot be *forced* to be covered by BY-SA unless 1) it
includes BY-SA work 2) the work it outputs is a reproduction of an
already a BY-SA licensed copyrighted work 3) the person who runs the
program chooses to place the resulting original work that they hold
the copyright to under the BY-SA. For much the same reason, Microsoft
cannot claim copyright on anything most people write with Word. ;-)
For VRML or X3D or SVG, which are structured file formats that
represent 2D or 3D graphics, the file should be BY-SA. Any scripts it
uses should be GPL. Both structured data and scripts may (or may not)
be "software" but it's important to look at the differences as well as
the similarities: the former are structured data files representing
artistic works, the latter are executable program code representing
functionality.
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.
- Rob.
More information about the cc-community
mailing list