On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:50:16 +0100 Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote: > Ben Finney escribe: [...] > > If, instead, we *define* the "source" of the work so that it's as > > the GPL defines it, then all these impossible-to-provide > > environmental factors you cite are not required. All that's required > > to meet "source" is the preferred form of the work for making > > modifications. > > Again I agree but there exists "sampling" which is a way for making > modifications of existing material without the need of "source". Just > think about collage... "The preferred form for making modifications" does *not* imply that there's no other form (more or less) suitable for modifying the work. It just means that the source is the *preferred* one... People may and do modify compiled programs using hex editors and/or disassemblers or decompilers, without having access to source code (think about the so-called "warez dudes" that strip anti-copy mechanisms from proprietary programs, for instance). That *doesn't* mean that the compiled form is (always) the preferred form for modifications: in most cases, those people would rather have access to C code (for programs written in C), instead of being forced to edit the compiled binary! -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/etch_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian etch installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgps1Z5SHVuoD.pgp
Description: PGP signature