15

If you are the copyright holder, you are allowed to license however you wish. An example of a license you can use is the Common Public Attribution License, which contains this clause (paraphrased): […] the Original Developer may include […] a requirement that each time an Executable and Source Code or a Larger Work is launched or initially run […] a ...


6

Congusbongus's answer provides excellent information on what I believe to be the removal and inclusion of a project's logo. However, I want to focus more on another part: changing the logo. This dives a little more into copyright and trademark laws, the latter of which falls out of reign for most popular licenses: they come with no mention, or generally an ...


4

If there is no copyright, then open source licenses generally do not bind you. Whether there is copyright in this case is a legal question, for your (company's) lawyer(s). You should not assume this is the case, if it at all matters.


4

Yes, but you should leave the license as-is, since it's far more likely that others will be willing to use something under the MIT license - which has been reviewed and re-used by a lot of people - rather than under some one-off custom license that no-one has heard of. Also, you need to read the license and understand exactly what it means. In particular, ...


3

Use of a software license for media should be discouraged in general but it really depends on how the software license is written. Considerations about specific licenses follow. GPL Section 0 of the GNU GPL 3.0 license contains a definition of "The Program": "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this License. and Section 1 ...


3

Often, these things are usually trademarked, if not copyrighted as well. However, a lot of the larger, more major companies provide to people various guidelines that allow people to use their trademarked, but they are often covered by various restrictions. Google, as an example, has a comprehensive help center for trademark guidelines. Although these may be ...


3

TL;DR - You shouldn't use a software license for non-software, and you shouldn't change an existing license. I want to know just what can be licensed with a MIT license. The MIT license is a software license, so in general, that's all it should be used to license. There's no inherent restrictions on your licensing something else with it... but as you've ...


3

If you make a derivative work of a GPL work, then the one downstream licensing requirement that the GPLv3 makes of you is in 5(c): You must license the entire [modified] work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole ...


3

If you consider your artwork to be a derivative of a GPL-licensed icon set, then the rules are quite simple: the derivative work, as a whole, must be licensed under the GPL. This is explicitly stated in the GPL FAQ: Am I required to claim a copyright on my modifications to a GPL-covered program? You are not required to claim a copyright on your changes. In ...


2

The GPL is intended primarily as a software license. However, it is worded so that it can apply equally well to non-software works such as icons1. From the definitions section of the license: "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this License. The license refers to the covered work as "the Program", but that doesn't necessarily mean ...


2

Firstly, IANAL/IANYL. That said, your question accepts that you have created a derivative work of the input icon set, which is handy, because it means we don't need to address that whole thorny issue. The GPL requires that derivative work be released under the GPL or a more-permissive licence. So you could release the whole work under GPLv3. Or, since ...


2

There are two issues, licensing your application and licensing the images that it generates. I think your question is about the latter. I'd embed the license information in the image. PNG supports textual metadata, which you put in a tEXt, zTXt, or iTXt chunk. If you are writing GIF or JPEG images, you can embed the license information in "comment" ...


1

It is a copyleft license because any larger work that includes part of the work you received must be released, as a whole, either under the same license or under a similar license that meets stated criteria. Please don't use it for software... https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#FreeArt You might consider CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. An example of ...


1

You need to use trademark law for this, not copyright. To register the logo as a trademark, and enforce it isn't misused, you'd need to consult a real lawyer. It being otherwise open source, users are certainly allowed to remove the logo, change the name and sail away into the sunset. It happened with Firefox and other Mozilla products, which restricted the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible