On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 18:40 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
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.
I'm afraid I think the GPL would be a terrible licence to apply to music. I can't think of a sensible definition of "source" and "program" that would apply to music without trying to fudge things (i.e., trying to treat a performance the same as compilation). The GPL also doesn't recognise the separate, severable copyrights that subsist in most music - all of which must be licensed. Trying to licence all those copyrights simultaneously under the GPL would result in a dog's breakfast, in my opinion - I don't know how you could define what was "source" with regards a performance, for example, in a way that made sense wrt. the obligations of the GPL.
Music is a special case - the law treats it very differently (i.e., having several copyrights subsist in a single work - you don't usually have different rights to the same thing) and I think that demands a different licensing scheme.
Cheers,
Alex.