FDL requirements for original author

Alex Hudson home at alexhudson.com
Tue Feb 5 11:18:10 UTC 2008

On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 11:17 +0000, David Gerard wrote:
> In practical use on Wikimedia sites, it's generally been taken to mean
> that whatever the reuser receives under GFDL is the transparent copy -
> e.g., even if the author made a picture in Inkscape, if he releases a
> rendered PNG under GFDL then that's the thing that's released under

The question of transparency is more objective than that; the file
format has to be readily amenable to editing. E.g., a PNG with a lot of
text is not transparent, even if that's what the author released.

If the original release from the author is not transparent, I think
subsequent distributors could fall foul of the opaqueness rules, and
would be unable to distribute according to the license. I wouldn't see
that as being any different to releasing a binary under the GPL; just
because that's what was released doesn't make it "the source" (the
requirements in the two cases are very different, though, so maybe not
directly comparable).



More information about the Discussion mailing list