Karol Kreński wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 02:26:40PM +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote:
>>Sure, but in this case the author, Karol, released the *images* as GPL
>>(does not matter with what program were created).
>>I guess in such case a Creative Commons license would be more
>>appropriate, but I am not sure if Share Alike would not pose the same
> Hmmm, I somehow prefer GPL vs Public Domain idea, at least for computer
> programs. Since I am running into problems like this (a need to attach
> the source .svgs to the magazine), or the problem "can my GPL images be
> submitted to openclipart which requires Public Domain submissions?" I
> think the best solution is to switch into Public Domain.
I also am a big fan of GPL, but GPL is a license worded precisely for
code, it may not fit for other wind of works: documentation, images,
CreativeCommons does not necessarily means Public Domain, they have a
broad spectrum of licenses, from the most restrictive
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs to Public Domain.
For example one of these, Attribution-ShareAlike
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/) is very similar in
permissions and requirements with GPL.
> And so I just did on my gallery website - the images are now Public