Acceptable Licenses for Boost-Doc SVG Icons

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Acceptable Licenses for Boost-Doc SVG Icons

peter foley-2
All,

(I have cross-posted this to the Dev list as recently there had been
some discussion over licensing and to ensure that this gets the
appropriate visibility by interested people.  If you respond to this
post could you please move it to the boost-docs list.)

To assist with the revamp of the look and feel for the Boost
Documentation project (http://tinyurl.com/2uxfut) that Matias is
currently spearheading I am trying to find SVG icons that are licensed
under a Creative Commons style license (the icons I am currently
recommending are specifically licensed under the "Create Commons
Attribution Share-Alike license" http://tinyurl.com/aj2s6).

>From reading through the archives and the recent thread about the
current status of licensed code within Boost and reading the link off
the boost home page for the Boost Software License
(http://tinyurl.com/2xood5).  It appears that the preference is for all
code and documentation to be licensed under the BSL.

Rather than risk proposing icons that are not licensed appropriately and
then find that the license type was not acceptable I thought I would
solicit feedback first.

I have two questions for you to answer:

The first question is: Would image files be "required to" or "the
preference is" use the BSL.

The second question is: If it was decided that it is only a preference.
Would the above linked license (Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike
license) be acceptable to the boost community?

Thanks,

Peter.

PS:  Not that it is relevant if there is a requirement for the Icons to
be licensed under the BSL we might need to find someone with some skill
in creating icons (I don't have a graphical bone in my body =p)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Acceptable Licenses for Boost-Doc SVG Icons

pabristow
 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [hidden email]
>[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>Peter Foley
>Sent: 28 June 2007 09:18
>To: [hidden email]
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Subject: [Boost-docs] Acceptable Licenses for Boost-Doc SVG Icons
>
>All,
>
>(I have cross-posted this to the Dev list as recently there had been
>some discussion over licensing and to ensure that this gets the
>appropriate visibility by interested people.  If you respond to this
>post could you please move it to the boost-docs list.)
>
>To assist with the revamp of the look and feel for the Boost
>Documentation project (http://tinyurl.com/2uxfut) that Matias is
>currently spearheading I am trying to find SVG icons that are licensed
>under a Creative Commons style license (the icons I am currently
>recommending are specifically licensed under the "Create Commons
>Attribution Share-Alike license" http://tinyurl.com/aj2s6).
>
>>From reading through the archives and the recent thread about the
>current status of licensed code within Boost and reading the link off
>the boost home page for the Boost Software License
>(http://tinyurl.com/2xood5).  It appears that the preference is for all
>code and documentation to be licensed under the BSL.
>
>Rather than risk proposing icons that are not licensed
>appropriately and
>then find that the license type was not acceptable I thought I would
>solicit feedback first.
>
>I have two questions for you to answer:
>
>The first question is: Would image files be "required to" or "the
>preference is" use the BSL.
>
>The second question is: If it was decided that it is only a preference.
>Would the above linked license (Creative Commons Attribution
>Share-Alike
>license) be acceptable to the boost community?

I don't think Boost  *requires* its own license, but it is highly desirable to avoid legal FUD.

IANAL, but the license conditions look fine to me.  And pretty similar to Boost.

So keep things simple for the lawyers - so we can say all the stuff is Boost license - it would seem to me that we could simply add
the Boost license to the SVG files?  Or is this too much of a fudge.

>PS:  Not that it is relevant if there is a requirement for the Icons to
>be licensed under the BSL we might need to find someone with some skill
>in creating icons (I don't have a graphical bone in my body =p)

Let's avoid re-inventing these wheels if possible.

Paul

---
Paul A Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
+44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS
[hidden email]

 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Acceptable Licenses for Boost-Doc SVG Icons

Matias Capeletto
> >Peter Foley wrote:
> >All,

Hi Peter!

> >To assist with the revamp of the look and feel for the Boost
> >Documentation project (http://tinyurl.com/2uxfut) that Matias is
> >currently spearheading I am trying to find SVG icons that are licensed
> >under a Creative Commons style license (the icons I am currently
> >recommending are specifically licensed under the "Create Commons
> >Attribution Share-Alike license" http://tinyurl.com/aj2s6).

I think CC is a very good license. I was using some GPL icons in my
own docs from KDE-look.org. I put an acknowledgment to the authors at
the end of my docs.
I think that it will be nice to have BSL graphics, but lets face it...
we are C++ developers, no icon designers. I fail to see legal problems
because of icons use.
Another approach will be to ask icons authors if they can licence the
particular ones we want in BSL with a dual approach. I think they will
be really happy to see that an important project like Boost cares
about their work.

> >I have two questions for you to answer:
> >
> >The first question is: Would image files be "required to" or "the
> >preference is" use the BSL.
> >
> >The second question is: If it was decided that it is only a preference.
> >Would the above linked license (Creative Commons Attribution
> >Share-Alike
> >license) be acceptable to the boost community?

Paul A Bristow wrote:
> So keep things simple for the lawyers - so we can say all the stuff
> is Boost license - it would seem to me that we could simply add
> the Boost license to the SVG files?  Or is this too much of a fudge.

That will be just great. But we must ask icons authors first.

> >PS:  Not that it is relevant if there is a requirement for the Icons to
> >be licensed under the BSL we might need to find someone with some skill
> >in creating icons (I don't have a graphical bone in my body =p)
>
> Let's avoid re-inventing these wheels if possible.

Totally agree.

Welcome Peter, thanks you very much for being the spear-head of the
SVG icons project.
Best regards
Matias

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs