On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Anthony
<wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote:
Most people have no clue what the term
"derivative work" means, but I
would assume that most people who do have a clue would agree that a
newspaper article which contains both photos and text is a derivative
work of both the photos and the text.
To be honest, I've always considered such a mash-up of objects to be
an "Aggregation", which is defined in section 7 of the GFDL. Including
a picture with some text, neither of which actually cause the other to
be modified, and both of which use different licenses, form a single
aggregate document and not a derivative.
Being an "aggregation" under the GFDL does not preclude being a
"derivative work", so far as I can tell. Do you disagree with this?