[cc-community] [cc-licenses] Most important feature: GPL-compatibility
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Sat Jan 28 16:07:48 EST 2012
drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> writes:
> On Saturday 28 January 2012 00:21:35 Ben Finney wrote:
> > drew Roberts <zotz at 100jamz.com> writes:
> > > [the GPL] 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.
> Yes, but you cannot pin down that preferred form for the example
> chains given.
Why do you say that? The source form is defined by the GPL, such that
there is always a source form of the work.
There are problems of interpretation, that need to be figured out on a
case-by-case basis. But the source form of an existing work always
*exists*, it's just a matter of figuring out what that form is.
If the license tried to pin down exactly what the source form should be,
it would rapidly be overtaken by technological advancement. It's a good
thing that is not the case.
> I am saying they can copy it. It is just that we can suffer analog
> degradation. Now the original and the copy are both instances of the
> same work but are not necessarily both examples of the preferred form
> for making further copies.
I think that's not a problem. If it is technically infeasible to make a
perfect-fidelity copy of a work, then a perfect fidelity copy cannot be
the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.
If you photocopy a poem in a bad photocopier, you have *modified* the
work – and passed along the source form of the modified work (the
photocopy itself). The same seems to apply to any copying process that
is limited by the physical copying process, such as sculpting.
> So, if I pass on the copy of the work I made, I cannot pass on the
> preferred form along with my copy as I don't own the preferred form.
If your act of copying produced a modified work, and the resulting
object is its own preferred form of the work for making further
modifications, then it seems you are satisfying the source requirement
of the GPL.
> The works can be copied, just not perfectly copied by everyone. And a
> license which requires passing on such copies will cause problems in
> instances where they can't be passed on.
I don't see the GPL requiring perfect copies. It does assume digital
information (software) and perfect-fidelity copies, but what in its
language do you see *requiring* perfect-fidelity copies?
\ “I got up the other day, and everything in my apartment has |
`\ been stolen and replaced with an exact replica.” —Steven Wright |
More information about the cc-community