On 05/02/2008, hwe hwe@fsfe.org wrote:
I'm promoting use of the FDL for textbooks and lecture notes at our university. It critically depends on section 3. The specific question is: *If I publish my own work as a PDF under the FDL in the web, do I need to provide the LaTeX sources?* Section 3 of the FDL requires publishing a transparent copy if more than 100 opaque copies are published. Since PDF is opaque, the background questions are
- Does the FDL apply in full to the original author as well? Ie.,
does the term `copy' in sec 3 denote `piece' (also original) or `REprocution' (which does not cover the original)?
The license applies to reusers; the author can release what they like under GFDL (or any other license), because they are the copyright owner.
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 GFDL.
I would assume you don't *have* to release the LaTeX sources, any more than you have to release working drafts or research notes. The document you release under GFDL is the document you release under GFDL.
I welcome correction if I'm wrong on this!
- d.