Re: Free Art License

[Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:24:47PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> >The source is defined as "The source code for a work means the 
> >preferred
> >form of the work for making modifications to it."
> >
> >It's not always clear what the preferred form of modification would be
> >for a piece of media. [...]
> 
> So specify it.

That's a very bad idea; it'd merely be *his* preferred form, and the GPL
doesn't say "the original author's preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it".

It's not acceptable to say "the preferred form for modifying this program
is the C code", and likewise it's not acceptable to say "the preferred form
for modifying this audio clip is the MIDI data" or "for modifying this image
is the PSD", for pretty much the same reasons.  The GPL allows me to take
the program/audio/image and treat any form as source, as long as it really
is my preferred form for modification.  I can distribute assembly code as
source, even if I received it as C code, if I really did compile it to
assembly and then made my modifications to the assembly.

People should not be trying to attach a specific "this is the preferred
form", since it raises questions about what they really mean--if they're
saying that others must always use that source form, it's not the GPL
anymore, and DFSG-unfree as it limits modification; if they're merely
saying what their own source is, it's irrelevant.

-- 
Glenn Maynard