Re: JPL Planetary Ephemeris DE405
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: JPL Planetary Ephemeris DE405
- From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 20:38:12 +1100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 85k1uw87az.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
- References: <20180222233731.GA18752@dashie.lan> <87tvu8v9e4.fsf@caltech.edu> <1519725881.928043.1284821680.2D0E65C7@webmail.messagingengine.com> <857eqy9jzy.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <9f2b7fb3-1f30-ae90-1ec4-2916dc943528@gmail.com> <20180227233931.42ff2169d829314be1d11706@paranoici.org> <9dee5a35-df5a-c40e-185d-e546ea63ffd2@gmail.com> <87a7vtbasn.fsf@gmail.com> <ytzzi3ts3zq.fsf@news.ole.ath.cx> <[🔎] aff27fdc-4588-53ae-c90e-f8edce2ea613@gmail.com>
jonathon <jonathon.blake@gmail.com> writes:
> The source code for the ephemeris is physical observations of the stars,
> planets, and other bodies in it.
The physical observations are not a work of expression; likewise, my
physical observation of a mountain is not a work of expression. They may
be the “source of the data” in some sense, but that sense is not
relevant for figuring out the license on a work of expression.
In the mountain example, the mountain is not a work of expression;
a digitally-recorded photograph of that moment at a place and time *is*
a work of expression. It may even be the source form of the work.
The “physical observations of [natural phenomena]” does not describe a
form of the work, so it cannot be the source form of the work.
Rather, the source form of the work is whichever form of the work – in
this case, some specific form of the ephemeris data – which would be
preferred for the purpose of making modifications to the work.
--
\ “Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do |
`\ so too.” —Voltaire, _Essay On Tolerance_ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Reply to: