[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian-approved creative/content license?

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!

 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

Reply to: