[Clipart] Posibility of GPL

Alan Horkan horkana at maths.tcd.ie
Fri Jun 18 12:17:53 PDT 2004

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Ted Gould wrote:

> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:10:10 -0700
> From: Ted Gould <ted at gould.cx>
> To: clipart at freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Clipart] Posibility of GPL
> On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 05:02, Rob Myers wrote:
> > I don't think public domain's a good idea because it doesn't grow
> > value. But I appreciate that any license that would require work
> > that includes Open Clip Art to be Open would be unusable for
> > commercial work. Possibly LGPL would be better than GPL, or some
> > sort of dual licensing.
> In short, no.  I think that to really understand you have to think of
> the practical reality of using the artwork.

I have to agree with Ted.

When I first joined this list I tried to voice my concerns and suggest
alternatives to Public Domain because I see the need to build value and
the danger of others shamelessly exploiting our work without giving
anything back.

Artists need materials that are Royalty Free.

If attribution is required it seems no one has found a way to meet this
condition in such a way that is not considered an "obnoxious advertising
clause".  With a clear description of exactly how this requirement could
be met it might be possible but it would be difficult to work out those

The thing is the only "license" so far that has met all the requirements
has been Public Domain.

There may be some way to retain copyright and at the same time allow
royalty free use of the material, that would allow the project to retain
more control.

If you have an answer please suggest it and if it meets all the necessary
requirements I'm sure it everyone will consider it carefully.
This projects is only new, we dont have all the answers yet.

- Alan

More information about the clipart mailing list