Free Music License?

Alexandre Dulaunoy alexandre.dulaunoy at
Mon Aug 15 08:31:45 UTC 2005

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ben Finney wrote:

> On 14-Aug-2005, Roland H├Ąder wrote:
> > I mean, we already a license for software (GNU GPL) and also for
> > documentation (FDL) but no license for music (FML = Free Music
> > License?). But you cannot compare music with software nor
> > documentation. Music is different to them.
> It's not different under copyright law though. If you want to grant
> the same freedoms, you can use the same license for *all* your
> software: programs, documentation, music, images, data, ...
> The GPL talks about "program" and "source code"; so long as you make
> it clear what you consider those terms to apply to, the GPL should not
> be problematic to apply to any copyrighted work if you want.

The definition of "Program" in 0.  is also broader as they use work as
definition :

"The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work,..."

So as  you said, if  you are able  to make a clear  separation between
"work" and "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to
it." the GPL can be used for any copyrighted work.

Keeping a single free license in  the free community is better for the
dynamic  of  the  community.

** Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) **** **** 0x44E6CBCD
**/ "To  disable the  Internet to  save EMI  and Disney  is  the moral
**/ equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria to ensure the
**/ livelihood of monastic scribes." Jon Ippolito.

More information about the Discussion mailing list