Phillipk is trustful creator of textures. I couldn't imagen to find any textures which they seem to be based from.
Noone here said Philipk is not trustful. The point is that CC-BY is not exactly GPLv2, and that "do what you want", although sounding very similar, does not include the "public domain" words.
Interesting. One thing I noticed is that
http://gpl.imageafter.com is not exactly the same thing as
http://www.imageafter.com: although the two parts of the site look very similar, their term of use differ: while it looks like stuff from gpl.imageafter.com is okay, suff from
www.imageafter.com is NOT complatible with OpenArena.
I just added a link to that site on the wiki, specifying to be careful about that difference.
DO NOT LINK[/b]) h t t p s : / / openarena . wikia . com/index.php?title=Graphics_resources_%26_tutorials&diff=15059&oldid=14435]Is that okay?By the way, talking about allowed files, AFAIK OA is licensed under GPLv2+, right? Then, can we also import "GPLv2 only" stuff or only "GPLv2+" stuff?
Note: "GPLv2+" means license text says like "[...] either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
Another thing I have not understood is if CC-0 (very similar to Public Domain) is allowed.
Trying to sum up:
- "GPLv2+" --> YES
- "GPLv2 only" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "GPLv3 only" or "GPLv3+" --> NO
- "Public Domain" --> YES
- "GPLv1 only" --> NO (Not very diffused, maybe?)
- "GPLv1+" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "GPL" without reference to version number --> I DON'T KNOW. In the text of GPLv2
here, under 9), it mentions
"If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." (however I would suggest to handle this thing quite careful, maybe checking the extended version of the license, that should be attached or linked somewhere near to the work using it)
- "CC-0" --> I DON'T KNOW
- "CC-BY" --> NO
- "CC-BY-SA", "CC-BY-ND", "CC-BY-NC", etc --> NO
- Other free licenses (examples: LGPL, AGPL, GFDL, MIT license,
etc.)--> I can guess NO
- "Do what you want" --> PROBABLY NOT, but I'm not sure (I would prefer if the author explicitly used "Public Domain" words. More, sometimes "do what you want" is accompanied by "tell me where you use it" or "mention me as author"... how to deal with them?)
- Copyrighted material --> NO
- Unknown/Unspecified license --> NO
- Dual licensing (e.g. "This file is released under GPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA 3.0") --> YES, but ONLY IF at least one of the licenses is one of those allowed (derivative files from further modifications would continue to live with OA's GPLv2+ alone?)
I would really like if Fromhell may confirm this, allowing us to write an "official" table explaining what is allowed and what not.I know that making our own textures is better and advisable, but sometimes starting from existing images can be very useful. And it is important to know what is acceptable and what now.
By the way, a thing I haven't yet understood about GPL license... does it REQUIRE to mention original image author (and/or source), like CC-BY does, or not?
Of course mentioning the original author
is advisable, but is it always necessary?