On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 15:01:30 +1100 Ben Finney wrote: > "Michael Gilbert" <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> writes: > > > Looking further, I could not find any Debian-approved licenses for > > creative (non-software) works [2], [3]. Is the Debian approach to > > just use a software license like GPL or BSD for creative content? > > Those licenses can apply to any software, not just programs. So, if > the software is an audio work or picture, a software license like GPL > or Expat can apply to it. Indeed. > > > Anyway, what recommendation should I make that will satisfy the > > DFSG? Thank you for your constructive thoughts. > > If the work is accompanying a program, it makes sense to license it > under the same software license. This is always a good recommendation. > In the case of a software work that > has no programs, a license like Expat should be fine. Agreed. > Even the GPL > terms could be used, so long as it's clear what "the preferred form of > the work for making modifications to it" means for that work. Agreed, with the addition that, IMHO, "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it" is always well-defined (even though sometimes it may be non-trivial to determine). Hence, I would recommend the GNU GPL (v2) whenever one wants a copyleft. -- http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpTqdu84243v.pgp
Description: PGP signature