BfW art license

tsr · Post by **tsr** » December 17th, 2006, 9:43 pm

Ok, inspired by the Ultimatum thread I somehow remembered that the FSF recomends something else than the GPL for art.

A quick search found me the Free Art License.

Maybe something to look into for the devs?

/tsr

Post by **turin** » December 17th, 2006, 9:51 pm

Even if we wanted to change, it would be essentially impossible to do this at this point, since we would have to contact everyone who has ever contributed art to the game* and make sure they agree to have their art relicensed under the FSL....

*: We couldn't just get it from people who currently have art in-game, either, since a lot of our current art is "derivative" from the art it replaces, and I doubt anyone remembers exactly what came from what.

Post by **F8 Binds...** » December 18th, 2006, 12:45 am

We would atleast need a quorum- one more than half to "conduct buisness", like the U.S. house / senate work.

Post by **SkeletonCrew** » December 18th, 2006, 7:39 am

F8 Binds... wrote:We would atleast need a quorum- one more than half to "conduct buisness", like the U.S. house / senate work.

INAL; The orginal artist holds the copyright and released his/her art under the GPL we can't relicence it without the approval of the orginal artist. Also note all art which has been released under the GPL will always be available under the GPL, you can't retroactive relicence things (unless you're part of the gouverment of course). This means everything released up to and including 1.1.14 (and probably also unreleased art in the SVN) will still be available under the GPL.

I'm no artist and don't intent to become one so I'm not going to comment about the possible change of the licence.

Post by **mog** » December 18th, 2006, 9:44 am

Agreed. Trying to change the license for all graphics in wesnoth would be nearly impossible and having parts of the graphics under a different license than others would be a pain to manage.

Ceri Cat · Post by **Ceri Cat** » December 18th, 2006, 9:58 am

As a writer and coder I tend to like using the creative commons license, however I tend to leave the licensing of the art and sound upto the individual who produced it unless I specifically commissioned it and then it's between the artist and myself to butt heads until one of us gives in on the licensing used. Yes it gets a bit complicated tracking it at times, but it works out better IMO.

In this case the simpler course of action would be to replace all the artwork with new material *shudders* or just leave it as is and sort out the artwork to come as is better. But yes the GPL is definitely not intended nor is really suitable for artistic works regardless of medium.