[Fwd: Re: gnome-themes and licensing]
Some artists unhappy with the wording of the (L)GPL are looking for free
art licenses, with or without copyleft. What would your recommendations
for such licenses be? The BSD or Artistic licenses look fine for the
latter case, but how about the former?
.''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : email@example.com
`. `' firstname.lastname@example.org
`- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
--- Begin Message ---
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le samedi 15 avril 2006 à 13:16 +0100, Thomas Wood a écrit :
Personally, I think it's understandable that artists may choose not to
distribute their work under the (L)GPL, which is primarily a license for
software. As long as the license they choose upholds the values of Free
Software, I don't see it as a problem. However, I know there have been
various lengthy discussions elsewhere about the status of the Creative
Commons licenses, so I would like to have some advice before continuing.
I think I would ask those people to wait for the 3.0 version of the
Creative Commons licenses, which promise to solve a number of small
issues that were raised with 2.0 and which are still present in 2.5.
Do you happen to know if there is any time scale for 3.0? I'd really
like to get started on revamping gnome-themes, but I can't do it unless
I can distribute the themes under a more appropriate license. If it's
likely that a 3.0 CC license is not going to be available before 2.16,
are there any other licenses that might be suitable to meet the needs of
artists and distributors such as Debian?
--- End Message ---