[odf-discuss] Apache2 and ODF (was: 16x16 mime type icons)
Pete Harlow
peter.harlow at gmail.com
Thu Nov 16 09:43:48 EST 2006
I'm still not sure where this leaves you if you want to combine the ODF
Monogram(tm) with, say, the background from KDE Crystal (as in
http://www.catnip.co.uk/opendocument/graphics/kdeodf64x64.png) as, despite
what we have said here, the Crystal Theme is under the LGPL
http://www.kde-artists.org/node/122
Any way, I'll do my page when I have FTP access. Do we want to add this info
to the fellowship wiki pages? I can do this tomorrow if you like.
-P.
On 16/11/06, Daniel Carrera <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:
>
> IANAL - Yes, I think so.
>
> On Thu, 2006-16-11 at 15:14 +0100, Pete Harlow wrote:
> > So I should really state that the icons are Trade Marks rather than
> > Copyright... which I presume I can state with no further action as
> > they are not *registered* trade marks?
> >
> > -P.
> >
> > On 16/11/06, Daniel Carrera <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:
> > Thomas, I'm sorry, but you are confused. You are going on and
> > on about
> > copyright licenses and copyright licenses have nothing to do
> > with icons.
> > Yes, we know this for sure, yes we did talk to a lawyer. The
> > Software
> > Freedom Law Centre said that for icons copyright law is
> > completely
> > irrelevant, and we should be looking at trademark law. No
> > point in
> > talking about GPL, LGPL, BSD or Creative Commons, that's all
> > copyright
> > stuff. The SFLC said they couldn't represent us, but suggested
> > we get
> > legal advice and get a trademark license. Yes, they did
> > suggest getting
> > a trademark license. They just said to make it permissive.
> > That's what
> > we have today. We also asked Ubuntu (as an example of a
> > GNU/Linux
> > distro) if the license we picked was acceptable to them, and
> > they said
> > it was, and that they would be willing to use the icon using
> > that
> > trademark license.
> >
> > Daniel.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2006-16-11 at 14:45 +0100, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > > I think you are confusing two points here.
> > >
> > > * The bsd-original license meant that in documentation or
> > other places where
> > > the end product was shipped the name of the author(s) was to
> > be placed. This
> > > is indeed a no-go as you saw.
> > >
> > > * The point that CC makes is that the author of the work
> > needs to be
> > > registered very much like the author of a piece of
> > sourcecode adds his name
> > > to the header of the file.
> > > This is required by copyright law. If there is no named
> > copyright holder you
> > > can't copy the copyrighted content. As well as a license, if
> > there is no
> > > license, you can't copy the work.
> > >
> > > If you read the actual license[1] you will see that (4 a and
> > b) will require
> > > anyone to a) point out the actual license the files are
> > under and b) the
> > > name/email of the author.
> > >
> > > This is (legally) different from what you have on your page
> > now and IMO not a
> > > problem at all.
> > >
> > > 1) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.5/
> > >
> > > On Thursday 16 November 2006 14:05, Pete Harlow wrote:
> > > > Thomas,
> > > >
> > > > It was *having* attribution that was the problem. The deed
> > says "*
> > > > Attribution*. You must attribute the work in the manner
> > specified by the
> > > > author or licensor." and I suppose it is possible to say
> > "No attribution
> > > > required". But I am told many projects shy away from
> > contributions under
> > > > the CC licence because of 'attribution creep', the
> > requirement to keep and
> > > > manage huge lists of contributors.
> > > >
> > > > On 16/11/06, Thomas Zander <zander at kde.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 16 November 2006 13:29, Pete Harlow wrote:
> > > > > > IIRC the problem with the CC licence was the one of
> > attribution, and
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > > > the FSF licences obviously one of using the work in
> > commercial
> > > > > > packages.
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you try the wizard I linked to?
> > > > > It allows for attribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not that I think its a smart thing to ask for if your
> > first goal is to
> > > > > have a
> > > > > big uptake.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thomas Zander
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > odf-discuss mailing list
> > > > > odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> > > > >
> >
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > odf-discuss mailing list
> > > odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> > >
> >
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
> > --
> > "I AM in shape. Round IS a shape."
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > odf-discuss mailing list
> > odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> >
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pete Harlow
> > Catnip Corner - Photography by Pete Harlow - http://www.catnip.co.uk/
> > OpenDocument Icons - http://www.catnip.co.uk/opendocument/icons/
> > OpenDocument Fellowship - http://opendocumentfellowship.org/
> > Play Ogg Vorbis on your iPod - http://www.rockbox.org/
> > _______________________________________________
> > odf-discuss mailing list
> > odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> > http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
> --
> "I AM in shape. Round IS a shape."
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>
>
>
>
--
Pete Harlow
Catnip Corner - Photography by Pete Harlow - http://www.catnip.co.uk/
OpenDocument Icons - http://www.catnip.co.uk/opendocument/icons/
OpenDocument Fellowship - http://opendocumentfellowship.org/
Play Ogg Vorbis on your iPod - http://www.rockbox.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20061116/6f630292/attachment-0001.html
More information about the odf-discuss
mailing list