[Clipart] Clipart License
glennrp at comcast.net
Tue Apr 13 05:24:36 PDT 2004
At 07:39 AM 4/13/2004 -0400, Daniel Carrera wrote:
>Glenn Randers-Pehrson wrote:
><snip: BSD-style license />
>>>If it does, I will contact Lawrence Lessig and ask him if he would be
>>>willing to prepare a Creative Commons license which is essentially ammounts
>>>to "all is permitted".
>> CC already does. Look at their page where you "choose a license".
>> There is Public Domain, Attribution (two flavors), GPL, LGPL.
>1) GPL and LGPL are *not* "all is permitted" BSD-style licenses. And you
Yes I know that.
>2) Public Domain is not a license.
Sorry, I was simply listing what is on the page.
>3) Attribution licenses are *not* "all is permitted" licenses either. They
In the equivalent
software licenses (BSD, zlib/libpng) it is only required to keep the
attribution info with the source, not the displayed result. So,
putting the author and copyright info in a PNG text chunk would be
sufficient, and you wouldn't see it in printed or displayed copies.
If that isn't sufficient under the CC license, maybe CC could produce
a revised version ("source attribution" or "embedded attribution" or
something) where putting the attribution in a PNG text chunk or
equivalent would be OK.
If that's not possible, then I'd say stick with PD.
>I am talking about a BSD-style license without attribution. The kind that,
>in practice, permits everything that public domain, but the author still
>holds the copyright.
>> The more generous of the "attribution" licenses seems appropriate. It
>> is equivalent to BSD, MIT, and zlib/libpng licenses.
>Attribution is not acceptable for clipart.
Agreed, if "attribution" means displaying the author/copyright info
alongside the clipart wherever it is used.
More information about the clipart