[Tux4kids-tuxtype-dev] non free sounds & better backgrounds

[Caroline Ford]

2009/9/16 Caroline Ford <caroline.ford.work at googlemail.com>

> I'll check to see if any are 2.0+
>
> Sent from a mobile device.
>
> On 16 Sep 2009, at 10:38, Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org> wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> On Donnerstag, 10. September 2009, David Bruce wrote:
>>
>>> So, TuxType is now 100% compliant - hooray!
>>>
>>
>> Hooray indeed!! Caroline, many thanks for your work on this!
>>
>>  We should mention the licensing for the new sound files in
>>> README_SOUNDS.txt.
>>>
>>
>> IIRC this has happenend already - I can't check atm as I'm writing this
>> offline and haven't updated my tuxtype svn checkout in a while...
>>
>> But, IIRC there were some files which were only released under a Creative
>> Commons 2.0 licence, which sadly ain't free according to the DFSG... out
>> of
>> my head I'm not completly sure whether 2.5 is sufficient, 3.0 is definitly
>> fine (provided it's the right CC licence, ie allowing commercial
>> redistribution..)
>>
>> Instead of removing those files now, I'd propose to ask the authors to
>> relicence them under a 3.0 CC licence - IME most everybody is fine with
>> that,
>> it just needs to be done ;-)
>>
>>
>> regards,
>>   Holger, who is really really happy about this and very confident that we
>> will
>> sort out those pesky details :)
>>
>>
I'm looking at these now.  http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses says that the
only acceptable CC licenses for Debian are CC-BY 3.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0.

We have some that are _only_ 2.0 and 2.5 (and one that I think is a 2.5 with
additional restrictions that I think we should remove regardless) .

I posted on twitter about the annoyance of incompatible free licenses and
Greg Grossmeier (from Ubuntu) said that if I modify (make a derivative work
of) the 2.5 or 2.0 original I can release under 3.0. (
http://twitter.com/g_gerg/status/4127509381)

He says this is in part 4b of the CC-BY-SA 2.5 license.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/legalcode

"You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly
digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License, a
later version of this License with the same License Elements as this
License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that contains the same
License Elements as this License (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Japan)."

As I've modified all of the backgrounds by things such as cropping does this
mean I can re-license under the DFSG-free CC-BY-SA (or CC-BY) 3.0? Will this
be okay for Debian?

I noticed that click.ogg which tuxtype described as non-free is also in
tuxmath, but without being flagged up. Do we/should we do anything about
this?

Caroline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/tux4kids-tuxtype-dev/attachments/20090920/edd55415/attachment.htm>