[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: photo licenses

Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> 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
> license.
>     <URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt>

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?

Sorry, GFDL.



This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Reply to: