Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
Moderator: Forum Moderators
- AxalaraFlame
- Posts: 690
- Joined: December 4th, 2011, 1:07 pm
- Location: Pasadina, Caltech
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
Ok, they abused it. What shall we do?Wussel wrote:Axalara you can not steal open source. You can only abuse it. Claiming it as your own would not be acceptable, but additionally not successful anyway. Using it without being open source yourself seems to be not good. However that was written based on source code not graphics. So lawyers might enjoy this topic. This Polish side might need the information, that they use this graphics from Wesnoth, if a user uploaded it. Relax... Breath..
@Koo
I send that guy a letter and warned him
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
You are in no position to do this.AxalaraFlame wrote:@Koo
I send that guy a letter and warned him
I don’t think I need to explain why.
Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.
- AxalaraFlame
- Posts: 690
- Joined: December 4th, 2011, 1:07 pm
- Location: Pasadina, Caltech
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
@shadowm
But I can do this, and we cannot let him continue to do this. It is personal business and I believe that does not matter with "position".
But I can do this, and we cannot let him continue to do this. It is personal business and I believe that does not matter with "position".
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
No, it is not personal business. You are neither a copyright holder nor a leader in any mainline development area. And frankly, your communication skills are not fit for the task. This should be our (the mainline developers and artists) business, not yours.
Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
So you can't use Photoshop to edit a GPL image, since Photoshop is not GPL, or what?lurker wrote:You cannot use images without a license. So either their program is derived and they have to obey the GPL or it is not and they cannot use the images at all.pauxlo wrote:A program using an image is not a derivative of the image.
The image is distributed, and it itself must be relicensed to anyone who gets it (e.g. it must be accompanied by at least a mention of its license), yes. But this does not mean that the game itself must be GPL-licensed. (And in this case, the game is not actually distributed, only the image. But even if they are distributed together, this is not linkage.)
This is specifically mentioned in the license:
GNU GPL v2.0 wrote:In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License.
- AxalaraFlame
- Posts: 690
- Joined: December 4th, 2011, 1:07 pm
- Location: Pasadina, Caltech
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
All right...@shikadilord
I saved my letter as a draft. Kick his ass for us
I saved my letter as a draft. Kick his ass for us
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
Moved from Art Contributions to Developers’ Discussions.
If anyone who is not a Forum Regular, Art Contributor, or Developer needs to post here, please PM the Administrators group.
If anyone who is not a Forum Regular, Art Contributor, or Developer needs to post here, please PM the Administrators group.
Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.
Re: Another stolen Wesnoth graphics report
I am fine with the developers (finally) taking care of this, and do not have stakes in it. But I cannot let this stand:
Regards
Lurker
Photoshop and other image processing software is designed to open and work with any image not a specific one. And they are not shipped with the images the user may process. The website in question not only ships the images in question, it uses them as an integral part of the user experience. (From the screenshots it looks like some help screen or skill tree or something like that). So your attempted "reductio ad absurdum" is just that: absurd.pauxlo wrote:So you can't use Photoshop to edit a GPL image, since Photoshop is not GPL, or what?lurker wrote: You cannot use images without a license. So either their program is derived and they have to obey the GPL or it is not and they cannot use the images at all.
This is not a mere aggregation. As I said, the images are (or seem to be) used as an integral part of the software. And if you would like to ask rhethorically: "Where do you draw the line?", I answer: This is why we have humans as judges, not computers: because for a human it is actually quite simple to decide whether a specific instance crosses the line, even if that line is not fully specified. In my opinion (but formed only from the screenshots) this instance does cross the line quite obviously.pauxlo wrote:The image is distributed, and it itself must be relicensed to anyone who gets it (e.g. it must be accompanied by at least a mention of its license), yes. But this does not mean that the game itself must be GPL-licensed. (And in this case, the game is not actually distributed, only the image. But even if they are distributed together, this is not linkage.)
This is specifically mentioned in the license:GNU GPL v2.0 wrote:In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License.
Regards
Lurker