Re: Defining 'preferred form for making modifications'
Scripsit Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
> On Sunday, Jun 22, 2003, at 08:11 US/Eastern, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > But if they are not the preferred form, it is illegal to edit them (at
> > least, it it illegal to distribute the edited gifs).
> If you merge the layers of an image, then edit pixel-by-pixel the
> resulting image, the edited version is now the preferred form --- it
> must be, because it's the ONLY form. No other form contains the same,
> or substantially same, information.
That was the point I was trying to make.
> What I can't do is edit the image with layers in xcf, then flatten it
> and call that source.
OK, then lets turn the complexity up a notch:
The GPL'ed source contains ugly xpm's that upstream created pixel for
pixel in Emacs because he knew no better and thought he was only
making a proof-of-concept implementation anyway. I import the xpm into
the Gimp, painstakingly separate the raw pixels into reasonable
layers, then add nifty colors and drop shadows. Finally I merge the
layers and quantisize the image, then save as xpm again.
Will I be in violation of the GPL if I distribute it withough *also*
saving it as xcf and distributing that? If no, would that change if it
took me several editing sessions to get the look right, and I saved my
intermediate work as xcf?
--
Henning Makholm "Larry wants to replicate all the time ... ah, no,
all I meant was that he likes to have a bang everywhere."
Reply to: