Re: photo licenses
Ben Finney <email@example.com> wrote:
> If you want to allow just about any use of the work, while still
> retaining copyright, you can distribute your work under the Expat
Which also talks explicitely about software...
Is there no license which talks about images or photos?
> The GPL's definition of "source" is clear, but leaves the term
> "preferred form for making modifications to [the work]" undefined
> (deliberately, I believe). For this reason, where it's not clear even
> to *you* what this term means, it may be best to avoid the GPL for
> these kinds of works and choose a free license that is not a copyleft.
Do you have any other suggestions of free licenses?
> Works that Debian can redistribute from the public domain are
> DFSG-free. Whether a work truly is available in the public domain is
> sometimes surprisingly difficult to determine.
Ok, so you do consider these pdphoto.org 'public domain' photos
> > And the second is DGPL 1.2, which I understand is not acceptable?
> I don't know of a DGPL. What license do you mean?
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.