Hey all,I've been thinking recently about the issue that Creative Commons does not specify a copyleft license which would require the distribution of "source form" for art that has a source form seperate from its distribution form. Examples could be: images/videos rendered from blender models, PDFs rendered from LaTeX, music in audio files that was originally created in a sequencer, etc.
CC-BY-SA does not really require that derivatives that then get "compiled" must provide anything like a source offer along with their distribution.
I'm wondering if GPLv3 or other strong copyleft licenses in existance would have the desired effect when appiled to art? I know the GPL was very specifically written for software, but with very similar goals.
-- Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted edition right joseph
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
