[cc-licenses] Most important feature: GPL-compatibility
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Wed Jan 18 18:31:36 EST 2012
"Greg London"<email at greglondon.com> writes:
> Look, even the source code requirement of GNU-GPL has to stop at
> physical objects because physical objects are no longer derivatives.
More relevant is that a physical object is not covered by copyright. The
reproducible *expression* is covered by copyright.
So “the source form of a work” is referring to a reproducible
expression, not a physical object. In the current age, it's software
(digital information), not hardware (physical medium).
> Second of all, if the origunal "source" of a work is some physical
It isn't, simply because that's not a form of the work relevant to
> If someone wants their art to be made part of a software program, and
> that program is gnu-gpl, then the art should be gnu gpl too.
To the extent that we're talking about works covered by copyright, and
not physical objects, I agree.
\ “A life spent making mistakes is not only most honorable but |
`\ more useful than a life spent doing nothing.” —anonymous |
More information about the cc-licenses