On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 19:32 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Greg DeKoenigsberg (gdk@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > Anyway, that's the proposal. If you have an objection, please be as > > specific as you can possibly be. We want to take action on this soon. > > How would these terms relate to Diana's and Máirín's gimp/photo stuff? It's > neither schwag, nor website, nor a distribution itself. Does this fall under > 'things approved by Fedora Art'? Darn it, I meant to write something about this in my last reply too. We need to address the licensing issue for this stuff too in the acceptable use policy. Perhaps we could make the acceptance hinge on the licensing for the art? I think everyone would probably agree that any Creative Commons "NC" is not free enough (probably "ND" as well), but what about "BY" and/or "SA"? Are there other licenses that work well for art? -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board Fedora Docs Project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
