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

List:       kde-artists
Subject:    Re: K-ARTIST: Icons in documentation
From:       Ante Wessels <vitanova2 () softhome ! net>
Date:       2004-06-22 9:08:19
Message-ID: 200406221108.19977.vitanova2 () softhome ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

On Lunes 21 Junio 2004 19:28, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> Hello.
>
> The Apache Avalon [1] project is considering using some of the Crystal SVG
> icons for our documentation, in particular, a new website we're working
> on.  However, I have a couple of questions regarding licensing:
>
>   1. Your addition to the LGPL specifically mentions Graphical User
>      Interfaces, but not XML or HTML documents.  My reading of the
>      LGPL leaves me somewhat confused as to whether XML/HTML documents
>      would qualify as "works which use the library" or "deriviative works."
>      The difference may appear subtle but significant.  In the first
>      case, XML/HTML documents would be outside of the scope of the
>      license as stated in section 5.  In the second case, the XML/HTML
>      documents would fall under the exceptions in section 6.


"Graphical User Interfaces" is meant in the broadest possible way. Go ahead.

>
>      I could understand arguements for either case.  Perhaps the XML/HTML
>      source documents alone are simply "works which use the library" but
>      when presented as a complete browse-able website become "deriviative
>      works."  Or perhaps that is taking it too far.  I am interested
>      in your intentions on using the LGPL in this case.
>
>   2. Regardless of the XML/HTML documents being derivative works or not,
>      I do believe that in the case of web documentation, the XML/HTML
>      source code and site in general could be under some other license
>      (free or closed) while the images remain under the LGPL.  In this
>      case, prominent notice of library use and access to the SVG source
>      should be made.

Yes

>
>   3. Do raster images which incorporate the icons qualify for the
> exceptions under section 6?  That is, if I take an icon and include it in a
> larger image which is perhaps releases as a PNG file, is this larger image
> a strict derivative and thus under the LGPL or does it qualify for the
> exceptions under section 6?  An example of such an image can be found at:
>         http://www.jadetower.org/muses/images/avalon-merlin3.png


They main intention of using the lgpl is keeping the images free, so that we 
can always use derivatives. Use what you like, do what you like, keep it 
free, and we are happy.

>
> Thank you!
>
> J Aaron Farr
>
> [1] http://avalon.apache.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> kde-artists mailing list
> kde-artists@mail.kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists

-- 

vriendelijke groet,
cordialemente,

Ante



******
The most up to date info for kde artists can be found at the wiki:
http://wiki.kdenews.org/tiki-index.php?page=KDE+Artists
old:
http://kde.ground.cz/tiki-index.php?page=KDE+Artists

Scripts for kde artists, like svg2png4kde, add border, add drop shadow, change 
filename, file conversion:
http://home.uwnet.nl/~vita/linux/index.html

Web course italian, poem generator, poetry, stories and visual art:
http://home.uwnet.nl/~vita
_______________________________________________
kde-artists mailing list
kde-artists@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]