[cc-licenses] Source Requirements
zotz at 100jamz.com
Sat Dec 2 15:16:15 EST 2006
On Saturday 02 December 2006 03:10 pm, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> <quote who="drew Roberts" date="Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 02:58:39PM -0500">
> > On Saturday 02 December 2006 11:55 am, James Grimmelmann wrote:
> > > That is, with software, you need source code in order to make full
> > > use of the relevant freedoms; with many other sorts of works, you do
> > > not need the source code to enjoy those freedoms.
> > I disagree with this strongly. I just feel that it is next to
> > impossible to properly express such a "source" requirement in simple
> > language and so have to content myself to live without it.
> Really, I think I disagree with both of you. I think it's always
> important and frequently very easy to include a source requirement for
> In fact, I have used the GPL for many non-software works; nobody
> confuses a PDF or a printed copy of a book with the "preferred form for
> modification." When I, as the author, want to make a change to a work, I
> pick up one copy and not the other. It's not hard for me to make that
> distinction in most cases and it wouldn't be hard for a judge to either.
> In practice, there are very troubling corner cases that open space for
> disagreement. There are some in software too (look at the discussion
> around the nv driver now). However, there is a larger number of works
> for which we don't require source through CC licenses where doing so
> would be both useful and easy.
Well, explain further as I am all ears. I would love to release ardour
multitrack project files and at least be sure to get back individual wav
files representing tracks if anyone re-does my stuff.
all the best,
(da idea man)
National Novel Writing Month
Sayings (Winner 2006)
More information about the cc-licenses