Re: [gNewSense-art] Re-Licensing Artwork.

[r. siddharth]

al3xu5 / dotcommon wrote:

> Just let me try to summarize what emerged from the discussion so far.
>
> We have two possible options with respect to how to handle artwork (images,
> videos etc.) instrted in the GNS's web pages:
>
> OPT.1)
> Similar to Wikipedia, we can consider artwork in the GNS's wiki to be
> aggregated with the text: then there would be no problem keeping text under FDL
> and artwork under CC BY-SA.
> But it is not so easy to assess if an image is or not aggregated with text, and
> every case is different from other: then there would be problems in the future
> or in some specific situations.

Brett Smith said [1] :

> It's our position that when images are used to illustrate an article,
> the combination is a single work, and so the licenses of the components
> must be compatible.  We wrote some more about this at
> http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/2007-05-08-fdl-scope

This (Brett's comment) necessarily means that the images that are used 
/as part/ of the Documentation _must_ be licensed under a license 
compatible with the license of the Documentation. As a consequence, the 
images used in the Documentation should also be licensed under GFDL (in 
our case), I want to know if this already true ? This leads me to my 
next question :

 Are images that are used /as part/ of Documentation count as 
"Artwork"? Or by "Artwork", we mean only the wallpapers, logos and the 
like ?

I am asking this because, if images which are part of Documentation are 
considered as "Artwork", then we cannot apply OPT.1) as the text and the 
images in the Documentation should necessarily be licensed under a 
compatible license.


> OPT.2)
> We can decide to "migrate" the whole (both text and artwork) GNS's wiki to
> FDL only.
> This leads to:
> - first, ask contributors (copyright holders) of the artwork (mostly images)
>    that is already inserted on the GNS's wiki to dual licensing their works
>    under both FDL and CC BY-SA
> - then, provide that from now on all the new artwork on the GNS's wiki is
>    required to be licensed under the FDL (changing in an appropriate way the
>    license statement in the footer)
> This way needs some activities to be performed now, but should avoid problems in
> the future.
>
> (I hope that this overview is complete and accurate.)

Why can't the new artwork be dual licensed (GFDL & CC BY-SA) ?


> Personally, I think OPT.2 is better.

Noted.


I thank you.

[1] : 
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnewsense-dev/2012-05/msg00002.html
--
rsiddharth
http://rsiddharth.ninth.su/