Re: Proposed statement wrt GNU FDL
Anthony DeRobertis <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 11:26, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>> On one hand, the
>> benefits to be gained from a free-software-like approach to purely
>> artistic/aesthetic (i.e., non-functional) works aren't as obvious.
> A rather ironic statement in a Bazaar-type development of the wording of
> a position statement, methinks :-)
> Also, I must strongly disagree in general. Take artwork for example.
> Suppose you create a (digital) painting of a flower, and you make it
> red. I decide that orange would be better, so I change it. Maybe aj
> comes along and thinks the leaf would look better if it were a little
I'm not sure we're disagreeing, actually. The bit you quoted was more
a "setting up the problem" bit, which I then argued against in the
rest of the message. I think it is the case that the benefits aren't
as obvious, but that doesn't mean that they aren't there. What's
more, given that restrictive licensing isn't actually necessary to
protect the pride-in-work style interests of authors, there's no
reason for them.
Jeremy Hankins <email@example.com>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03