[cc-community] Use cases for cc by-sa compatibility with GPL
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sun Jan 22 09:10:26 EST 2012
On Saturday 21 January 2012 22:12:13 Anthony wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2012 7:34 PM, "Ben Finney" <bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au>
> > 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.
> But what has to be conveyed is not merely "the source form of the work", it
> is "the machine-readable Corresponding Source".
You sure about that? The only place that phrase occurs in the gplv3 is here:
"6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.
You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections
4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding
Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways:"
So if you convey the source form and not the object form in the first instance
then this bit does not kick in.
The gpl is just not good for non code. Even the preamble should be enough to
scare you off from using it for art/music/literature.
all the best,
More information about the cc-community