Licensing policy change proposal

Krešimir Čohar kcohar at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 12:23:36 GMT 2019


I don't think there are any problems with using public domain images, and
even if there were I'd rather view them as challenges to overcome than
obstacles to avoid.

> These are both non-free licences and we can not ship files which can
only be copied with their restrictions.

Why not? As far as Unsplash goes, their only restriction is not to start a
competing service, which is not even remotely what we are trying to do.
Surely that is a reasonable and acceptable restriction. It's not unlike the
copyleft restrictions ("freedoms") of the GPL.

I don't know about the Pexels license though. It purports to be free, but
the wording is very vague and it's hard to gauge how equivalent it is to
CC0. But I think that just means it bears a closer look, not that it should
be rejected outright.

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:24 AM Jonathan Riddell <jr at jriddell.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 18:04, Krešimir Čohar <kcohar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The licenses are:
> > - the Pexels license: https://www.pexels.com/photo-license/
> > - the Unsplash license: https://unsplash.com/license,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsplash#License
>
> These are both non-free licences and we can not ship files which can
> only be copied with their restrictions.
>
> > - the Creative Commons Zero License:
> https://spdx.org/licenses/CC0-1.0.html
>
> We can of course ship files which are in the public domain as they are
> unrestricted, it doesn't need a change to our licence policy.
>
> Jonathan
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20190128/0e66a82e/attachment.html>


More information about the kde-community mailing list