On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 08:39 +1100, Jonathon Coombes wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 10:24 -0800, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > >On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 21:45 -0500, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> > >> Jonathon,
> > >> 
> > >> Do you think there's a chance we'll convince the release team to
> > >> include a few more templates, photos and clipart with OOo? I've been
> > >> arguing about that for ages. There are thousands of public domain
> > >> photos from Open Clip Art and tons of templates we could be shipping
> > >> with OOo.
> > >
> > >>From memory, the main issue with clipart,photos etc were that
> > >Sun could not validate them. So what they wanted was for all
> > >submissions (same with the code) to be licensed as Sun being part
> > >owners. This idea was absurd when it came to public domain images etc
> > >and I believe it was put to the community council to look at
> > >alternatives to the license for special cases such as art, templates
> > >etc.
> > 
> > Hm. We just finished the latest of several discussions on such matters.
> > Far as I recall without looking at the archives, public domain is
> > acceptable.  Also acceptable for the site.  But, you are right, one does
> > need to ensure it really is public domain.  is that what you mean by
> > "validate"?
> 
> Yes. The burningwell site is a place where people can upload their own
> photos to contribute to other people under public domain license. Most
> of the photos will be from amateur photographers such as myself. :)

Another site that may be of interest to people is at

http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/

There are actually a range of licenses, but this is probably
the closest to what OOo would use.  This license area alone
has over 50000 photos available. That should be enough for
any user :)

Regards
Jonathon


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to