Mark Waddingham covered this in his post: Whilst the GPL can be used to cover content there are more (GPL compatible) suitable ones. The main problem with applying the GPL to content is deciding what constitutes the 'source code'. Indeed, I believe there is an FAQ on the FSF site about such things but I can't find it at the moment (slow internet connection on a train!). Generally the Creative Commons style licenses are far better for content - you just need to pick a variant which is definitely compatible with the GPL (CC/0, for example).
Sent from my iPhone > On 2 Mar 2016, at 10:58 AM, Robert Mann <r...@free.fr> wrote: > > == Remains to be cleared the position vis a vis content (audio, video, text, > images) what is the position of the creators? Can it be clarified? Did they > mean that all content be, in their interpretation, included in the GPL? Is > that written up somewhere in a specific proviso or just "thought" ? _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
