[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-artists
Subject:    Re: K-ARTIST:artwork license
From:       Torsten Rahn <tackat () kde ! org>
Date:       2002-03-31 19:57:10
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Sonntag, 31. März 2002 13:56 schrieb ante:
> On Sunday 31 March 2002 01:57, luciash d' being wrote:

> > > Yes, otherwise KDE could end in trouble." No discussion of the GPL
> > > part.
> > of course. i think it is not possible to use mac or any other original
> > commercially based os artwork in kde :(

Not only would this put us legally into trouble but even more PR-wise:
If you want to promote some new stuff you want to have your own original look 
and feel to set yourself apart from others and to make people realize that 
your product is different from the other one they are already using. 

> > why we don't speak even about the Artistic License (any version)?
> I mentioned the Artistic license just below.

From the licenses I have seen so far the Artistic license would fit best and 
would probably have the same meaning as the "free for commercial and 
non-commercial usage/distribution/modification as long as you give proper 
credits" -sermon I have been asking for :-)

> What is commercial software? Mandrake is commercial, it is a company, they

Yes, that's always the problem people don't realize.
I am very much opposed to a GPL-like license for artwork as it is really a 
PITA to have such artwork in CVS: 

All stuff that goes into kdelibs has got to be LGPL or BSD-licensed (that's a 
_required_ item for kdelibs. Especially for stuff like icons which people 
tend to reuse between different CVS-modules and move and copy it would really 
be difficult to have various licenses among the >1500 pixmaps.
For wallpapers and themes which stay outside kdelibs and which aren't that 
numerous different licenses would be quite ok imho.
 
> can not become proprietary. GPL and LGPL take care of that. BSD license
> does not ensure (art)work stays free. Public domain implies that you wave
> your copyright, you have no control left at all.

In countries like germany you can never ever loose your copyright on the stuff 
you have created anyways.

> Once it is Public Domain, you lost your copyright. You have no control left

That's not correct in countries like germany. You simply can't loose it there.

> There are 1700+ icons in KDE, we can not say: 53 % of them are GPL, the

Exactly - see my comment above.

> Technically, we can say: it used to be published under the LGPL, so almost
> everything is under the LGPL. It is best to go on publishing everything
> under the LGPL.

As I already said: I was told by a lawyer that the GPL/LGPL might not be good 
licenses for artwork. Also I am not opposed to somebody using some of my work 
in proprietary software.
There are just too many different situations where this gets complicated:

- imagine a company which creates proprietary KDE-software: If they wanted to 
use some KDE-icons to create the look and feel of a KDE-application and if 
they would have to modify some icons to adjust them to their set of features 
they wouldn't use KDE's icons.
- imagine some company which would produce a software which would be free in 
some cases and proprietary in others (or using some extensions). This would 
create some difficulties as well (Trolltech or Klarälvdalens Datakonsult or 
Ximian would be an example for this).

And last but not least: personally I feel honored if people use my icons in 
their software (as long as they give proper credits) no matter if it is 
proprietary or free software. I have been an advocate for free software for 
quite some time but I do understand that in some situations people have their 
reasons to keep their work proprietary.

I also could imagine though that I produce some artwork that I would not like 
to see in proprietary applications. But that would rather be the fact for 
themes or wallpapers, true pictures or something like that.

> > i agree it is not good enough to use just a sentence as a license but i
> > am for using Artistic License

Yes, that sounds better to me as well. The only reason I haven't done this 
until now is that I am not really aware of the differences between the "free 
for ..." and the Artistic License.

Greetings,
Tackat


_______________________________________________
kde-artists mailing list
kde-artists@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]