[License-discuss] Strong copyleft for art

[Christopher Allan Webber]

Stephen Paul Weber writes:

> 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.

I think GPLv3, as I have read it, would still apply given "preferred form
for modification" language.

I am increasingly pro-GPLv3 for cultural works.