William Stein wrote: >> The major difference I see between GFDL and CC-by-sa is that CC-by-sa >> does not have the requirement that the source be distributed with the >> work. > > The statement you just made above about GFDL is false. The relevant > statement in the GFDL is: "If you publish or distribute Opaque copies > of the Document numbering more than 100, you must either include a > machine-readable Transparent copy along with each Opaque copy, or > state in or with each Opaque copy a computer-network location from > which the general network-using public has access to download using > public-standard network protocols a complete Transparent copy of the > Document, free of added material." It is important to read the > definitions in order to understand the previous sentence -- see > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html
Yes, that's the text in the GFDL license I was referring to. I apologize if I over-generalized to the point of not being correct. I was hoping to succinctly capture one of the big philosophical differences between the two licenses. By "source" for a book, I meant a latex document, which is something that is specifically given as an example of a "Transparent Copy". So it still seems that GFDL has some sort of requirement about distributing a "Transparent copy" (in my case, a latex file; again, for details, see the the actual license). To my understanding, CC-by-sa has no such requirement to deliver a "Transparent copy", so, if I understand things correctly, I am perfectly legal in extensively modifying a CC-by-sa book (from the latex file obtained under the CC-by-sa license) and then only distributing the resulting pdf file, licensed under CC-by-sa. That's why I wish Creative Commons had an option to have some sort of requirement for a "Transparent Copy" distribution, like GFDL, making something like a CC-by-sa-src license. Thanks, Jason -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
