Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Daniel Carrera <daniel.carrera AT zmsl.com>]

Antoine wrote:
> It's *not* the same thing. In a PDF, the text itself is not altered...
>
> In an MP3 however, the work is definitively altered,

In a PDF the work may well be altered simply due to the limitations of 
an export filter. So, if "altering" is the criteria, then my giving you 
a PDF file as CC doesn't give you the right to edit the OpenDocument 
original.

Evan suggested that the criteria might be "creative altering". That is, 
not just altering in a way that can be automated, but one that actually 
requires a human (okay, this is a very short summary of a long and 
detailed line of reasoning).

> Take another example : if you are allowed to use a photograph of a
> painting, does it mean it also allows you to use the painting itself ? I
> don't think so...

Let's not confuse the issue by bringing physical objects. A painting is 
protected by property rights, independend of the *copy*right. That's why 
I can't modify it.

Cheers,
Daniel.
--
     /\/`) http://oooauthors.org
    /\/_/  http://opendocumentfellowship.org
   /\/_/  No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
   \/_/   However, a significant number of electrons were
   /      were severely inconvenienced.