[cc-licenses] Case study: Magnatune
daniel.carrera at zmsl.com
Wed Nov 23 05:37:56 EST 2005
> Daniel seems to think that PDF (non-editable) and OpenOffice
> (editable) versions of a text are different works.
No, I didn't say that. I gave an example to illustrate the consequences
of the reasoning proposed.
Someone argued that saving in a different format and losing some data
made it a different work. "If this is true", I said, "then the this
follows". It's just a tool for verifying whether the premise is sound.
Personally, I don't think that a PDF version and an OpenDocument version
are different works.
Side note: it's not "OpenOffice", it's "OpenDocument". There's a big
* OpenDocument is an industry standard (OASIS and ISO).
* OpenDocument is superior to the old OpenOffice format.
* Many applications support or plan to support OpenDocument:
> Back to the Magnatune's case, if their WAV files contain
> extra creative details that are missing from the mp3 versions,
> then you cannot freely distribute the WAV files.
What if they sound the same to me? :)
/\/_/ No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
\/_/ However, a significant number of electrons were
/ were severely inconvenienced.
More information about the cc-licenses