Re: Defining 'preferred form for making modifications'
Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org> writes:
> tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
> > Precisely when the xcf is the exact source of the actual gif in
> > question. If the gif has been modified on its own, then the source is
> > now the combination of both the xcf and the gif.
>
> Would you agree that there could come a point where the gif has been
> modified enough that the .xcf is no longer relevant source? While I
> wouldn't say this about a binary, I do think it's reasonable in the
> case of an image. The analogy of program used to create the image to
> language used to create a binary breaks down because the boundaries
> are harder in the case of programming languages.
Yes, there might be such a case, but I would say that a few edits
isn't such a case. And that the usual scenario isn't this at all;
it's people who simply throw away the xcf or outright refuse to
distribute it.
> Obviously, how much is enough would be a big question mark, and it
> isn't reasonable to expect everyone to agree on exactly where that
> line falls, especially in the abstract. That's why we have judges,
> after all.
Agreed.
Reply to: