Timeline for Licensing for artistic work used inside GPLv3 licensed software
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2015 at 15:33 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | Be careful. With the way the APK model works, I don't think it's possible to comply with the GPL on an Android app. (I know it's not on an iOS app.) It might be better to pick another open source license. | |
| Sep 16, 2015 at 15:31 | vote | accept | sunyata | ||
| Sep 16, 2015 at 15:31 | answer | added | sunyata | timeline score: 5 | |
| Sep 15, 2015 at 9:11 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/643713770473324544 | ||
| Sep 14, 2015 at 19:03 | answer | added | Craig | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 13, 2015 at 8:28 | answer | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 19:39 | comment | added | user22815 | @Ixrec I know, licensing and copyright are my least favorite aspects to our profession precisely for that reason: legal crap. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 19:37 | comment | added | Ixrec | @Snowman Right, I should've phrased that as "the fact that you used it on the code does not make it apply to anything other than the code". And the OP didn't appear to be asking if GPL was a good license to use on the assets so I just assumed that didn't need to be addressed. Legal stuff is hard... | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 19:35 | comment | added | user22815 | @Ixrec You can use GPL to license artistic works, or artistic components of software works. However, FSF recommend you use a free documentation license instead because it has different wording which has stronger legal force for that usage, making it more appropriate. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 19:01 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2950/should-hi-thanks-taglines-and-salutations-be-removed-from-posts
|
| Sep 12, 2015 at 18:55 | comment | added | Ixrec | I'm not a lawyer, but I'm fairly sure that yes, you can use any license you want for the assets (including no license at all) alongside using the GPL for your code. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 18:53 | comment | added | sunyata | @lxrec Alright, thank you! So very concretely since we are developing an Android app anything we put in the /res directory can have any license we want? | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 18:45 | comment | added | Ixrec | The GPL and other software licenses only pertain to the code (in source or binary form), and generally have no effect on the input and output of that code (which includes resources files like images and sounds). You can use whatever license you want for those other files, or none at all; with software there's generally a benefit to having an explicit license on everything but I don't think that's really the case for anything else, and I can't remember ever seeing a license for images other than "nothing" or some member of the Creative Commons family. | |
| Sep 12, 2015 at 18:43 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 12, 2015 at 19:35 | |||||
| Sep 12, 2015 at 18:40 | history | asked | sunyata | CC BY-SA 3.0 |