On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 15:52:25 +0200, David Philippi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Freitag 13 April 2007 schrieb Bruno Wolff III: > > In the case at hand it is possible, that the copyright owner didn't realize > > what licensing under the gpl really meant and didn't intend to do that. > > I've seen no proof that he released it under the GPL. He put it into a GPL > project but if he didn't explicitely put it under GPL then Adonthell is at > fault for not making including a LICENSE.txt which states that this file is > not under GPL.
I pretty much aggree with you. It seems likely that the copyright holder never intended to release the music under the gpl and it should just get removed from anything we (the Wesnoth project) distribute. > Compare it to Mozilla/Firefox with their redistribution problems due to the > fact that the logo is only free to use within the official project and not > patched versions. I don't think this example is revelant to the case at hand. In our case, it seems likely the copyright holder did not intend to release the music under the gpl. In the mozilla case the logos are intentionally trademarked and trademark law prevents redistribution. _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
