Hi, I'm involved in the game Red Eclipse[1], both in Debian and upstream.
We (upstream) were recently discussing including "art content" (in this case a sky texture) licensed under the GPL (v2+ or v3 likely). (Yes, GPL for art content is not a good idea in general, but that's a separate issue.) Red Eclipse currently includes a lot of art content licensed under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license, and as far as I have understood this license is incompatible with the GPL license? (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ccbysa mentions only version 2.0) My impression is that using content under both licenses is fine in the game itself, since it's dynamically used/displayed and not combined otherwise. However, what struck me as a problem here are screenshots, videos, etc. showing the game and the art content in it. A screenshot showing both a CC-BY-SA-3.0 texture and a GPL texture would be a derivative work of both pieces of content, and in that case said screenshot would be undistributable, since the licenses are incompatible. Is this assumption correct? And should combinations of art content with incompatible licenses in software that displays combinations of them, be something to be wary about (when creating screenshots and similar) for this reason? The counsel regarding thumbnails in screenshots.d.n covered screenshots and copyright in some aspects http://wiki.debian.org/ScreenShots#License_of_screenshots however it doesn't (I think) deal directly with this particular question. [1] http://redeclipse.net http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/redeclipse.html http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/redeclipse-data.html (redeclipse-data is non-free due to much of the art content missing "sources" (by the same argument that PDF files can be non-free)) Thanks -- Martin Erik Werner <[email protected]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1358352944.4535.48.camel@mas
