El 09/05/11 13:25, Sébastien Lanteigne escribió: Hello, Sébastien! Apparently, there is no a clearly statement about the copyright of Inkscape logo or the license to use it [1]. However, as it is not specified otherwise, there is the assumption that the logo has been released under the GPL 2 license since it is part of the source of Inkscape. [1] http://old.nabble.com/Inkscape-logo-license-tt22659124.html -- Allan Javier Aguilar Castillo Editorial Hagamos al Hombre Blog: https://gn126.wordpress.com Correo: gnu84@...2853... XMPP: gnu@...19... Teléfono: +506 8738-0397 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCM dpu s+:+ a? C++ UL P+ L+++ E- W++ N++ o-- K++ w--- O- M- V- PS- PE- Y+ PGP+++ t 5-- X R+++ tv+ b+ DI+ D+ G e h+ r% y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

On 05/10/2011 01:16 AM, Allan Javier Aguilar Castillo wrote: source identity. commons but under license. about However, as logo has On 05/10/2011 02:17 PM, Sébastien Lanteigne wrote: Oups that wasn't supposed to leave just yet... Let me start again. Right I'll put a note since the GPL is not compatible with the CC SA-3.0 I'm using. How can I link an SVG to another? That way I can release my work under CC SA-3.0 while keeping the linked document (the logo) under GPL. Seb.

On 05/11/2011 10:32 AM, Tőkés Ábel wrote: That would depend on which Creative commons license you decide on. There are 4 basic clause that build up the various licenses. BY - Attribution. Anyone using the work can do what they feel like as long as they attribute the original work to you. SA - Share alike. Any derivate must be shared under the same license. ND - No derivate. Self explanatory. NC - Non Commercial. Allows for any non-commercial use of you work. The GPL is incompatible with ND, BY and NC since the GPL specifically allow for derivate work, commercial work and does not specifically states that you must attribute the work. It only says that you have to state that you modified the code and leave notices intact. I may be wrong here. This is what I managed to work out. I'm not lawyer. Nothing. I don't really see this being a problem. Its more of a moral issue. I've been promoting free software for over a decade. The least I can do is respect the licenses. Years ago I decided I didn't need to pirate software and wouldn't. Respecting FOSS licensing fit in this category. If I intergrate the source for the logo directly in my code I need to license my entire code according to the GPL. If I link it then it's like using an open source library in an application and I can respect the license while releasing my work under my terms. Seb.