Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> a) declare that the images as they are are 'enough' to be considered >> 'prefered form of modification' and leave it as it is > > If the 3d models were available, I imagine they'd be the preferred form > for modification. > > Since they're not available, through neglect, I don't see that they're > preferred.
So deleting the source makes it ok to distribute binary-only? >> b) consider it a violation of the GPL and no longer distribute it > > If someone had the 3d models and they considered the sprites to be > derived works based on those models, then we'd have to go for option b). > > But you seem to be saying that this isn't the case. Well, so far I don't know a single case where a game released under the GPL that was rejected from Debian, however almost none of them comes with 'source' for the images that are used in them. So I am just not sure how Debian handles such situations in general or if it tries to handle them at all. -- WWW: http://pingus.seul.org/~grumbel/ JabberID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 59461927
