• Source: Artistic license

Artistic license (alongside more contextually-specific derivative terms such as poetic license, historical license, dramatic license, and narrative license) refers to deviation from fact or form for artistic purposes. It can include the alteration of grammar or language, or the rewording of pre-existing text.




History


The artistic license may also refer to the ability of an artist to apply smaller distortions, such as a poet ignoring some of the minor requirements of grammar for poetic effect. For example, Mark Antony's "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears" from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar would technically require the word "and" before "countrymen", but the conjunction "and" is omitted to preserve the rhythm of iambic pentameter (the resulting conjunction is called an asyndetic tricolon). Conversely, on the next line, the end of "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him" has an extra syllable because omitting the word "him" would make the sentence unclear, but adding a syllable at the end would not disrupt the meter. Both of these are examples of artistic license.
Another example of artistic license is the way in which stylized images of an object (for instance in a painting or an animated movie) are different from their real life counterparts, but are still intended to be interpreted by the viewer as representing the same thing. This can mean the omission of details, or the simplification of shapes and color shades, even to the point that the image is nothing more than a pictogram. It can also mean the addition of non-existing details, or exaggeration of shapes and colours, as in fantasy art or a caricature.
Certain stylizations have become fixed conventions in art; an agreement between artist and viewer that is understood and undebatable. A striking example is how in simple cartoon drawings' monochromatic white parts on a dark colored surface are immediately recognized by most viewers to represent the reflection of light on a smooth or wet surface.
In summary, artistic license is:

Entirely at the artist's discretion
Intended to be tolerated by the viewer (cf. "willing suspension of disbelief")
Useful for filling in gaps, whether they be factual, compositional, historical or other gaps
Used consciously or unconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally or in tandem




Dramatic license


Artistic license is often referred to as dramatic license when it involves the glamorization of real-world occupations for the sake of exciting television or cinematic experience. For example, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and other police procedural programs typically omit completely the more mundane aspects of the occupation such as paperwork, reports, administrative duties and other daily "business-oriented" aspects which in reality often constitute the majority of police work. They will also present other duties with much more action, suspense or drama than would be experienced in reality. The same is also true for many military-oriented adventure stories which often show high-ranking characters being allowed to continuously enter dangerous situations when in reality, they would usually be restricted to command-oriented and administrative duties.




Controversy and criticism


Artistic license often provokes controversy by offending those who resent the reinterpretation of cherished beliefs or previous works. Artists often respond to these criticisms by pointing out that their work was not intended to be a verbatim portrayal of something previous and should be judged only on artistic merit. Artistic license is a generally accepted practice, particularly when the result is widely acclaimed. William Shakespeare's historical plays, for example, are gross distortions of historical fact but are nevertheless lauded as outstanding literary works.
Critical voices are sometimes raised when artistic license is applied to cinematic and other depictions of real historical events. While slight manipulation for dramatic effect of chronology and character traits are generally accepted, some critics feel that depictions that present a significantly altered reality are irresponsible, particularly because many viewers and readers do not know the actual events and may thus take the dramatized depiction to be true to reality. Examples of films and television series criticized for excessive use of dramatic license include Disney's Pocahontas, Mel Gibson's Braveheart, Oliver Stone's Alexander, the HBO series Rome, 20th Century Fox's The Greatest Showman and Showtime's The Tudors.
Writers adapting a work for another medium (e.g., a film screenplay from a book) often make significant changes, additions to, or omissions from the original plot in the book, on the grounds that these changes were necessary to make a good film. These changes are sometimes to the dismay of fans of the original work.




References

• Source: Artistic License

The Artistic License is an open-source license used for certain free and open-source software packages, most notably the standard implementation of the Perl programming language and most CPAN modules, which are dual-licensed under the Artistic License and the GNU General Public License (GPL).




History






= Artistic License 1.0

=
The original Artistic License was written by Larry Wall. The name of the license is a reference to the concept of artistic license.
Whether or not the original Artistic License is a free software license is largely unsettled. The Free Software Foundation explicitly called the original Artistic License a non-free license, criticizing it as being "too vague; some passages are too clever for their own good, and their meaning is not clear". The FSF recommended that the license not be used on its own, but approved the common AL/GPL dual-licensing approach for Perl projects.
In response to this, Bradley Kuhn, who later worked for the Free Software Foundation, made a minimal redraft to clarify the ambiguous passages. This was released as the Clarified Artistic License and was approved by the FSF. It is used by the Paros Proxy, the JavaFBP toolkit and NcFTP.
The terms of the Artistic License 1.0 were at issue in Jacobsen v. Katzer in the initial 2009 ruling by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California declared that FOSS-like licenses could only be enforced through contract law rather than through copyright law, in contexts where contract damages would be difficult to establish. On appeal, a federal appellate court "determined that the terms of the Artistic License are enforceable copyright conditions". The case was remanded to the District Court, which did not apply the superior court's criteria on the grounds that, in the interim, the governing Supreme Court precedent applicable to the case had changed. However, this left undisturbed the finding that a free and open-source license nonetheless has economic value. Jacobsen ultimately prevailed in 2010, and the Case established a new standard making terms and conditions under Artistic License 1.0 enforceable through copyright statutes and relevant precedents.




= Artistic License 2.0

=
In response to the Request for Comments (RFC) process for improving the licensing position for Raku, Kuhn's draft was extensively rewritten by Roberta Cairney and Allison Randal for readability and legal clarity, with input from the Perl community. This resulted in the Artistic License 2.0, which has been approved as both a free software and open source license.
The Artistic license 2.0 is also notable for its excellent license compatibility with other FOSS licenses due to a relicensing clause, a property other licenses like the GPL lack.

You may Distribute your Modified Version as Source (either gratis or for a Distributor Fee, and with or without a Compiled form of the Modified Version) [...] provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
[...]
(c) allow anyone who receives a copy of the Modified Version to make the Source form of the Modified Version available to others under
(i) the Original License or

(ii) a license that permits the licensee to freely copy, modify and redistribute the Modified Version using the same licensing terms that apply to the copy that the licensee received, and requires that the Source form of the Modified Version, and of any works derived from it, be made freely available in that license fees are prohibited but Distributor Fees are allowed.
It has been adopted by some of the Raku implementations, the Mojolicious framework and the NPM. It is also used by the SNEeSe emulator, which was formerly licensed under the Clarified Artistic License.
The OSI recommends that all developers and projects licensing their products with the Artistic License adopt Artistic License 2.0.




See also


Software using the Artistic license (category)




References






External links


Version 1.0
The Artistic License – The original Artistic License 1.0, the one which is still used by Perl and CPAN; They use a disjunction of the Artistic License 1.0 and the GNU GPL for Perl 5 and above.
The Clarified Artistic License
Version 2.0
The Artistic License 2.0 – It's e.g. used by Parrot.
2.0 revision RFC process
Prominent uses
Dusk – The first online Novel and Blog written under Artistic License 2.0.
"R.E.M releases videos under Artistic License 2.0 – Is about R.E.M.'s choice of the Artistic License 2.0 for videos from one of their albums.

Kata Kunci Pencarian:

• Parallel Virtual Machine
• Perl
• Simutrans
• By Hook or by Crook (film 2001)
• Emporte-moi
• Raku (bahasa pemrograman)
• Npm (perangkat lunak)
• Eternity and a Day
• ExifTool
• Alternatif hak cipta
• Artistic license
• Artistic License
• Free Art License
• Free-software license
• Comparison of free and open-source software licenses
• Artistic License (album)
• License
• Biggest ball of twine
• The Oxford Murders (film)
• BSD licenses