Re: [Widelands-public] Licensing and graphic sources

[Alexia D. <ale...@ho...>]

You are missing the point. I don't mind that the work is given away! Not 
one bit. What I mind is that there is no clarity about it. GPL is not a 
good license for art. Look at my link in previous mail.  That is a 
license as free as GPL but  made for artwork. No ambiguity, no 
unclarity. It is clear and direct. All derivatives are under the same 
license on whole or in part.

People are funny this way, artists more than most, they hold away if 
something is unsure or unclear. If conditions are clear, they are more 
willing to give.

 
Aggro wrote:
> Alexia Death wrote:
>
>   
>> What about a script export of a model to be used for a fully commercial 
>> game? if you follow this logic that is fine too. You see what kind of  
>> unclarity I'm trying to get at?
>>     
>
> Not really, but like I already said, only GPL or a license that gives 
> even more freedom to the user is allowed to be used with the images. So 
> no matter how big of a problem we have there is no point to continue the 
> disgussion about whether we should change the license or not, because we 
> simple can't do it.
>
>
> The best you can do is to start a new project which goal is collect a 
> data packet (images etc.) licensed under any license you wish, and then 
> distribute it as you wish, but not with the Widelands.
>
> Users could then install this package over Widelands datafiles and use 
> the images etc. from it.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Widelands-public mailing list
> Wid...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/widelands-public
>
>