Hi Pavel, Perhaps I misunderstand then. Many of the images I linked to are no longer copyrighted. You can use them in any way you want without restriction. The only requirement I'm aware of is that you credit the creator of the image.
In this case, attribution is to avoid plagiarism rather than to specify some sort of legal rights holder. To the best of my knowledge, the owner of the physical medium can't dictate how you acknowledge or credit them. (Though such a citation is often included for the sake of good manners.) For example, if I wanted to use one of Ansel Adams photographs in the public domain, I only need to specify Adams as the creator and the title of the work. In the US, this even goes further and covers reproductions of material in the public domain. If as a photographer, for example, I create a reproduction of the Mona-Lisa and place that photo on my website, the rights to that image are also in the public domain even though I took the photo. While it would be nice to be credited as the creator of the reproduction, I can't legally require it of someone (See Bridgeman V. Corel). The Wikimedia commons policy page has a pretty good overview of the US and EU law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain If you are concerned about providing too much publicity relative to the contribution (in effect, providing free advertising), a workaround might be to create separate contribution sections on the LyX website. Programming and documentation contributions might be acknowledged in the top most section (as these are likely more substantial) and then artistic (or outside?) contributions are acknowledged in a separate section (ranked lower on the page). I've seen this done for other projects and it seems to satisfy most people. Cheers, Rob
