[cc-community] [cc-licenses] Most important feature: GPL-compatibility
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Sat Jan 28 00:21:35 EST 2012
drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> writes:
> Copyright applies to statues. That is art embodied in stone, wood, or
> whatever. At some point it is the only embodiment of the work in
Nevertheless, the thing that accrues copyright is *not* the stone, the
wood, the atoms of the statue. Rather, it is the work of creative
expression that accrues copyright. Copyright doesn't apply to the stone,
wood, or whatever material substrate – it applies to the work.
> Now if a license
You've been asking about the GPL, so I assume you want this discussion
to continue to use its definitions.
> requires the preferred form of the work for modifications to be given,
> what is that form in this case?
As has been said many times: whatever is the preferred form of the work
for making modifications to it. If you say we're talking about the work
of expression embodied in a carved statue, the statue would seem to be
the preferred form.
> I keep giving examples of works where there may be at some point only
> one copy in existence (well, one original) and that copy is embodied
> in a physical object.
If someone can copy the creative work of expression embodied in a
specific statue, then we need to talk about what work of creative
expression is being copied. What is it?
If someone *can't* copy a statue – as you seem to imply every time you
introduce some extra layer of the work that would be more difficult to
copy – then why are you asking about copyright? Copyright applies when
some work of creative expression is copied, not otherwise.
I suspect you have in mind some work that *can* be copied, but then I
don't understand your motivation for seeking examples where the work
can't be copied.
\ “Nothing is more sacred than the facts.” —Sam Harris, _The End |
`\ of Faith_, 2004 |
More information about the cc-community