Licensing: dual licenses - icons

[Chitlesh GOORAH]

On 9/12/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Right to left as in random places? If so upstream needs to verify the
> licenses of these icons carefully.

We are both uncertain about the licensing right now. That's why I'm
asking on this mailing list.

> It does not. However the other way around is possible.  What problem are
> you trying to solve?

The problem I'm trying to solve is: which license should I use with
fedora's new licensing guidelines ?



On 9/12/07, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> GPL->LGPL is not a valid conversion indeed.

Ok, for now I'll be using GPLv2.

> It's more likely that the affected upstream projects either aren't aware of
> what's going on or don't really care about the license for something as simple
> as an icon. Most likely both. Still, it's bad.

kmenu-gnome's upstream cares, but needs advice.

> I'd say declare the license as GPL to be on the safe side. In this context, it
> probably doesn't make a real difference anyway. (How do you "link" a menu
> icon?)

The icons are listed on the desktop files.

Chitlesh
-- 
http://clunixchit.blogspot.com