Ken Arromdee wrote: > On Sun, 11 Mar 2007, Francesco Poli wrote: > >> In order to release the audio/video recording in a DFSG-free manner, >> they should release the source as well, as defined in the GNU GPL v2. >> >> Wonderful! That is a feature of the GPL, not a bug! >> Recipients should not be in a position of disadvantage with respect to >> original authors, or otherwise it's not really Free Software. >> > > It's a bug. If the original author puts a video under GPL and doesn't > release the "source", you can't demand it. He's not bound by the GPL since > he can't violate the copyright on his own work, so he has no obligation to > give you anything. > > So the result is that you can't demand source and can't distribute the work > either. That doesn't give free software the least bit of benefit. > > The problem with "source" for audio or video files is that the source is > much larger and much more awkward to distribute than the final result. It's > plausible that the author doesn't care what you do with his work, but doesn't > want to give you these files simply because it's a lot of trouble. If he > then puts his work under GPL, he may not even realize that he's given you > no permission to redistribute at all. > > > Also, it's very possible that stuff no longer exists. I know that when I do an audio project (quite infrequently), once I'm satisfied with the result, I toss away all the intermediate stuff (audacity project files and the like) and only keep the finished (wav/mp3/whatever).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature