On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:37:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Paul Tagliamonte <paul...@debian.org> writes: > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:28:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> Er, I don't understand why you think this is significant. The work > >> formed by taking the original and putting it under a different license > >> is trivially a derivative work. > > > While it's not defined to my liking in the CC* set, it defines a > > derivative work as:: > > > | "Derivative Work" means a work based upon the Work or upon the Work and > > | other pre-existing works,
I would say the same thing with a new license is "based upon the Work". The rest is a list of examples what _is_ included, not about what isn't. How does it imply that adding creative content is required? > > | such as a translation, musical arrangement, > > | dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound > > | recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form > > | in which the Work may be recast, transformed, or adapted, And there's this limitation, but it's not relevant here (or are you saying that it is?): > > | except that a work that constitutes a Collective Work will not be > > | considered a Derivative Work for the purpose of this License. > > > I'm not convinced a relicense is considered a work based upon the work. > > Just like a patch, I'd assume this to be a creative work / modification > > to the work. Are those not "Derivative Works" then? > Ah, I hadn't ever thought about it from that angle. Basically, the > argument is that if there's no original creative addition, it can't be a > derivative work? On first glance, 17 U.S.C. § 101 appears to support > that: I don't see how you read it in there either... > A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting > works, "one or more" implies that no second creative work is required. The rest is examples of what is a derivative work, but doesn't exclude anything. > such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, > fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art > reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a > work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of > editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications > which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a > “derivative work”. > > The definition does require that it be "an original work of authorship," > which isn't true of trivial changes to the original. You're talking about the definition of a "work" here, I presume? I don't see how that makes any difference. It doesn't say "two or more works"; just one is enough. Thanks, Bas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130913220947.gz21...@fmf.nl