[cc-community] Use cases for cc by-sa compatibility with GPL
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sat Jan 21 21:29:43 EST 2012
On Saturday 21 January 2012 19:33:58 Ben Finney wrote:
> drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> writes:
> > what if I, a sculptor, took a block of wood down to the local park
> > where you, another sculptor, had just installed your latest sculpted
> > stone masterpiece with the little brass plaque with your BY-SA license
> > details. So there I am in the park with my block of wood and I copy
> > your stone sculpture using my block of wood.
> What is it that you have copied? The stone? No. You have copied the
> creative work (and, by the nature of carving a sculture, made a modified
> copy or “derived work”).
> > I would say it is clear that your stone sculpture is the source of my
> > wooden one.
> I would not say that. You seem to mean “your stone sculpture is the
> inspiration for my wooden one”. That's not what the GPL means by
So is there no source for my wooden sculpture? Or is there a source for it
that you haven't named? Is the source for my wooden sculpture my sculpture
itself? My sculpture is its own source?
> Rather, the question the GPL raises about a work is: what is the
> “preferred form of the work for making modifications to it”. For a
> carved sculpture, it's clear to me that the sculpture itself is the
> preferred form for making modifications, and that would thereby be the
> source form of the work.
> The principle being upheld by requiring the source form of the work is
> that the recipient should not have any artificial restriction on making
> modified works of equivalent fidelity as the object they receive. Having
> a form of the work that is suitable for modification is a pre-requisite
> for making those modifications. Does that help clarify?
I am not sure but I may be being a bit dense on this point but it is not on
purpose if so.
all the best,
More information about the cc-community