On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:37:54 -0800 Vincent Cheng wrote: > Hi Martin, Hi Martin, hi Vincent, > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Martin Erik Werner > <martinerikwerner@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm involved in the game Red Eclipse[1], both in Debian and upstream. > > > > We (upstream) were recently discussing including "art content" (in this > > case a sky texture) licensed under the GPL (v2+ or v3 likely). Good, I hope the source (== preferred form for making modifications to the texture itself) is available. > > (Yes, GPL > > for art content is not a good idea in general, but that's a separate > > issue.) I respectfully, but strongly disagree with this misconception. In my own personal opinion, the GNU GPL is a very good idea for artistic works. > > > > Red Eclipse currently includes a lot of art content licensed under the > > CC-BY-SA-3.0 license, and as far as I have understood this license is > > incompatible with the GPL license? I confirm that CC-by-sa-v3.0 is unfortunately incompatible with the GNU GPL (both v2 and v3). [...] > > First off, IANAL. I am no lawyer, either. > > The general consensus seems to be that CC-BY 3.0, CC-BY-SA 3.0, and > CC0 are DFSG-compatible and GPL-compatible; Please let me clarify. TTBOMK: * CC0 (which is a public domain dedication, rather than a license) meets the DFSG and is GPL-compatible (as long as the source of the work under consideration is available, and barring other issues) * I am personally convinced that CC-by-v3.0 and CC-by-sa-v3.0 do not meet the DFSG * however, CC-by-v3.0 and CC-by-sa-v3.0 are currently accepted by Debian ftpmasters as DFSG-compliant, despite my repeated attempts to make them (and several other people) realize that they are wrong... * CC-by-v3.0 and CC-by-sa-v3.0 are GPL-incompatible (I had never seen anyone claiming that they are compatible! Vincent, if yours is not a typo, I think you somehow misinterpreted something about this topic...) [...] > I know that there's > probably a few people on -legal who may not see the CC licenses as > being DFSG-compatible, I am one of those few, actually. > but licenses are judged to be DFSG-compliant > and suitable for main by ftpmasters, not by debian-legal. ;) Yes, and, unfortunately, Debian ftpmasters seldom seem to be willing to explain and/or discuss their decisions... :-( > > > My impression is that using content under both licenses is fine in the > > game itself, since it's dynamically used/displayed and not combined > > otherwise. > > > > However, what struck me as a problem here are screenshots, videos, etc. > > showing the game and the art content in it. A screenshot showing both a > > CC-BY-SA-3.0 texture and a GPL texture would be a derivative work of > > both pieces of content, and in that case said screenshot would be > > undistributable, since the licenses are incompatible. > > I've never actually encountered a work that was dual-licensed under > both GPL and CC at the same time. As far as I understand the issue at hand, we are not talking about dual-licensing: this term is generally used to describe a disjunctive choice between two alternative licenses, among which the recipient may choose his/her preferred one. Here we are talking about a set of game data, a subset of which is available under the terms of a license, while another subset is under a different license. > Usually it's code being licensed > under the GPL and the game's assets licensed under the CC. Unfortunately... I definitely prefer the really DFSG-free cases, where both game engine and game data are, for instance, under the GPL. [...] > > Is this assumption correct? And should combinations of art content with > > incompatible licenses in software that displays combinations of them, be > > something to be wary about (when creating screenshots and similar) for > > this reason? I am not sure. When all the involved licenses are mutually compatible, we definitely have a much simpler and safer scenario. When incompatible licenses are thrown in, I don't know... -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgp71wdw0NnMz.pgp
Description: PGP signature