Re: Restrictive Artwork License
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Gergely Nagy <algernon@balabit.hu> wrote:
>> --> Is it even compatible with the GPL-2+ license of Freeplane?
>
> It's early in the morning, but my gut feeling is that no, it would not
> be compatible.
Why not? It's not uncommon for an upstream to give their code and
their art/data assets different licenses. In fact, it's quite common
for packages maintained in the Games team, e.g. 0 A.D. imposes a GPL2+
license on their game engine and a CC-BY-SA license on all their
artwork, music, and other game assets. There are also a number of
games packages where the engine is DFSG-compatible but the game assets
are under some non DFSG-compatible license (usually due to a
non-commercial usage clause), and thus packaged in Debian by putting
the engine in contrib and data in non-free.
The upstream Freeplane developers are well within their rights to
include non DFSG-compatible artwork if they wish. It just means that
we have to strip them out / replace them (c.f. Firefox/Iceweasel), or
move the package from main to non-free.
Regards,
Vincent
Reply to: