GPL and misunderstanding

Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:42 pm

Somehow people keep complaining on websites that we are using proprietary images although they are designed to put in CVS for CPG-Nuke.
GPL states that all files in a package must be GPL so also his images.

But somehow he keeps ranting about it so i'm clueless if he does or does not understand the GPL.

Anyway to get rid of it most of the images are removed anyway and now someone else gets the credit.
So i wanna give Brian Monnone a huge thank you for his awesome new graphic and the other person the credit he deserves.

When will the world stop bitchin about using OpenSource code by others?
After all they all accepted the OS License when they installed and modified something although they all didn't reed it. How ignorant can you be ?

Site Admin/Owner Joined: Aug 27, 2002 Posts: 17088

It is so simple. 2 basic rules. One says that if the code requires the GPL'd application to run, then the code is automatically GPL also. The second one is by choice. if I produce an image and tell you you can use it in a GPL'd application, then I just made it GPL. You're right. It is so simple.

Hangin' Around Joined: Oct 31, 2004 Posts: 33

I never commited ANY of my images using CVS or anything else using CVS to cpgnuke or dragonfly...

All images that I create are copyrighted by me at time of creation and just because I shared or let you look at the images dj does not mean that you have copyright on them or can put MY HARD work under a creative commons licsence. Your have ZERO right to those images since they are mine at time of creation since I am the one that created them and copyrighted them you can not change the orginal copyrights.

Go out and take a pepsi logo and commit it to your cvs and see if thats not legal just because you commit something to your cvs or to your open source program doesnt make it yours to begin with. even the original php-nuke and ravens distro include copyrights for the images.

Quote:

if I produce an image and tell you you can use it in a GPL'd application, then I just made it GPL.

No you need to have a release agreement... thats what the original copyright is for in the first place.

Also your big cheer out to Brian Mannone is for? he by his own admission just used a webding of that dragon and popped it down in a circle? I have no idea but that webding is probably copyrighted by whoever created it. I have no idea if brian or you have permission to use it but it seems highly unlikley to me all things considered.

Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:20 pm

paris,

I'm assuming this is directed to djmaze. I will just add one note and am not trying to get between the 2 of you. According to the lawyers at the OSF, if you agree to have any of your work included in the distribution of a GPL'd application, then that work is GPL as long as it is used with that application. Meaning, if I decide to do a fork, I, too, can use that work for the fork.

Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:43 pm

Exactly .... I never aggreed to it.

Where is the release agreement for each of those images that where used? it should be in the copyrights shouldnt it? just like it is on your site raven (kudos to you for giving credit)

As if its not bad enough already it seems they took MY HARD WORK and relicensed it under the creative commons liscense.... UM ALL THE STUFF I CREATE IS COPYRIGHT BY ME... at time of creation. As the creator of the images its not my burden to prove I have permission to use my own images it is the dragonfly projects burden to prove that they have permission to use each image and every image they use in thier project.

So where is the agreement / permission / credits ?