Hi, thanks for all the good input so far. I have in fact contacted the author of the original templates and asked for a different licensing.
> > I don't know why the code and "media" (or everything but the media, ie > > images in this case), couldn't be licensed separately, under AGPL and > > CC BY respectively. > > It can be generally, but we've found in some of these cases with > web templating engines that there are often not bright lines between the > two. > that is my understanding, too. I think modern web applications are very special in this regard, as they consist of server-side as well as client-side code, HTML, CSS and images. And it really is the sum of all those components that make up the application. > > Well, /if/ CC BY is not AGPL-incompatible, then you could just use > > I did in fact assume that CC-BY-SA was in use and I also assumed it's > AGPLv3-incompatible. It's indeed possible that a simple CC-By is > AGPLv3-compatible, but a careful analysis would be needed. It is indeed CC-By, which is also seen by many people who are far smarter than I am as incompatible with (A)GPL. Kind regards David _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.autonomo.us http://lists.autonomo.us/mailman/listinfo/discuss
