2011/2/19 David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>: > On 19 February 2011 11:58, Teofilo <teofilow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2011/2/19 David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>: >>> On 19 February 2011 10:54, Teofilo <teofilow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Everything that affects internationalisation should result into a >>>> e-mail from me. > >>> CC licensing does not affect internationalisation in any way whatsoever. > >> CC 2.0 does not. CC 3.0 does. > > > Please detail the legal problems in question. So far you're making > blank assertions which contradict pretty much everyone else's > understanding of them. >
In my view, the existence of "Canada French", "Canada English" etc... versions of CC 2.0 affects usability (or uploader-friendliness), but I don't see this as a legal problem. If you are talking about the legal problems I mentioned in my other mail, please have a look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Crystal_Clear_icons . They are licensed under LGPL (I mentioned GPL in that email, but LGPL is probably enough). LGPL licensing ensures that the SVG code (which is a kind of software code) is distributed alongside the icon. If the icon is converted into PNG or JPG, the distributor is required to provide the SVG source code alongside the JPG or PNG rendering. While computers can easily change a SVG into PNG or JPG, the reverse is impossible. It is important to keep the SVG source code intact, so that people can easily open it and create modified versions as easily as the icon creator could create the original version. If the icon is released into the Public Domain, nothing ensures that people will carry the SVG code each time they reuse the icon. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
