about screen licensing issues
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
I thought we had specified that the about screen must be licensed consistently for distribution with Inkscape (e.g. GPL). If it isn't, we wouldn't be able to accept it as the winner.
Bryce
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 07:19:54AM -0200, Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
well... the drawing itself doesnt need to be licensed under GPL. It is not adequate to use GPL for drawings. It is sufficient, though, that he uses some free content licence (such as some of the CC licenses)
But I havent seen this explicit anywhere. And I think we should clear this issue.
On Jan 22, 2008 8:21 AM, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote:
I thought we had specified that the about screen must be licensed consistently for distribution with Inkscape (e.g. GPL). If it isn't, we wouldn't be able to accept it as the winner.
Bryce
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 07:19:54AM -0200, Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for
free
content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We
should
also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work
(same is
true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:25:47 -0200, "Felipe Sanches" <felipe.sanches@...400...> wrote:
well... the drawing itself doesnt need to be licensed under GPL. It is not adequate to use GPL for drawings. It is sufficient, though, that he uses some free content licence (such as some of the CC licenses)
But I havent seen this explicit anywhere. And I think we should clear this issue.
FWIW, I concur.
-mental
MenTaLguY wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:25:47 -0200, "Felipe Sanches" <felipe.sanches@...400...> wrote:
well... the drawing itself doesnt need to be licensed under GPL. It is not adequate to use GPL for drawings. It is sufficient, though, that he uses some free content licence (such as some of the CC licenses)
But I havent seen this explicit anywhere. And I think we should clear this issue.
FWIW, I concur.
-mental
I've already been in contact with the author and we're getting it resolved (it's not an issue for him).
-Josh
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
Does that mean that in order for someone to sell Inkscape they have to change the about screen?
Aaron Spike
Unfortunately, the noncommercial restriction renders it incompatible with Inkscape. Do we have clearer copyright permission on the second and/or third place candidates to be able to redistribute under GPL?
Bryce
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:36AM -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
In my understanding, this is not good enough. It can't be included in commercial (enterprise) distros and can't be included on disks dold by the likes of CheapBytes.
NC *is* non-Free.
Fwiw, I think the only CC licenses which are GPL compatible are 'by' and 'by-sa'. The latter would be the preferred of the two. The others have restrictions making them incompatible with Inkscape's license.
Bryce
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:36AM -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
He was willing to go public domain or gpl, he doesn't care really. But Felipe said that GPL wasn't appropriate. And CC was mentioned, so he picked one. Would we prefer public domain or by-sa CC?
-Josh
Bryce Harrington wrote:
Fwiw, I think the only CC licenses which are GPL compatible are 'by' and 'by-sa'. The latter would be the preferred of the two. The others have restrictions making them incompatible with Inkscape's license.
Bryce
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:36AM -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
i said:
"free content licence (such as some of the CC licenses)"
when I said "some" I meant BY and BY-SA (and maybe some other that maybe eventually fit on the free content idea) but definitely not NC or ND!
I would suggest bysa, but public domain is good too.
Juca
On Jan 23, 2008 3:11 PM, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:
He was willing to go public domain or gpl, he doesn't care really. But Felipe said that GPL wasn't appropriate. And CC was mentioned, so he picked one. Would we prefer public domain or by-sa CC?
-Josh
Bryce Harrington wrote:
Fwiw, I think the only CC licenses which are GPL compatible are 'by' and 'by-sa'. The latter would be the preferred of the two. The others have restrictions making them incompatible with Inkscape's license.
Bryce
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:36AM -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
He has changed the license to CC-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Does everyone find this to be sufficient?
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement for free content licensing on the contest rules.
This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata.
Juca
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
He made it BY-SA.
-Josh
Felipe Sanches wrote:
i said:
"free content licence (such as some of the CC licenses)"
when I said "some" I meant BY and BY-SA (and maybe some other that maybe eventually fit on the free content idea) but definitely not NC or ND!
I would suggest bysa, but public domain is good too.
Juca
On Jan 23, 2008 3:11 PM, Josh Andler <scislac@...400... mailto:scislac@...400...> wrote:
He was willing to go public domain or gpl, he doesn't care really. But Felipe said that GPL wasn't appropriate. And CC was mentioned, so he picked one. Would we prefer public domain or by-sa CC? -Josh Bryce Harrington wrote: > Fwiw, I think the only CC licenses which are GPL compatible are 'by' and > 'by-sa'. The latter would be the preferred of the two. The others have > restrictions making them incompatible with Inkscape's license. > > Bryce > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:36AM -0700, Josh Andler wrote: > >> He has changed the license to CC-NC >> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ >> >> Does everyone find this to be sufficient? >> >> -Josh >> >> >> Felipe Sanches wrote: >> >>> I have seen on the winner about screen metadata that it is marked as >>> "proprietary". I can see no citation about free content licensing on >>> its page at devianART and I also notice that there was no requirement >>> for free content licensing on the contest rules. >>> >>> This could lead to problems on packaging for debian and other >>> gnu/linux distributions that have strict rules about licensing. >>> I think that we should add this requirement on the next contest. We >>> should also verify which license does needcoffee intend to use on his >>> work (same is true for the #2) and update the SVG metadata. >>> >>> Juca >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Inkscape-devel mailing list >>> Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel >>> >>>
participants (6)
-
Aaron Spike -
Bryce Harrington -
Felipe Sanches -
Josh Andler -
MenTaLguY -
Nicu Buculei