On 09/05/2012 08:19 AM, Karl Fogel wrote:
My understanding (I am not a lawyer) is that copyright only applies to creative works -- specifically, to works resulting from human creativity, or to the portion of a work that results from human creativity. This is why, for example, the information in a phone book cannot be copyrighted, but a song reciting those numbers could be.Or indeed, a work containing a creative form of organizing or presenting the phone numbers could be copyrighted, while the data could be /extracted from it/ and would not be covered by copyright.
There is one thing to watch out for: do your tools embed the copyrighted work of others in your work? It used to be that Inkscape /did, /and the same has been true for other tools.//In the case of Inkscape, it placed a raster texture called "Sand" in SVG works, and that texture was under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 . Wikipedians were uploading SVG images to Wikipedia and dedicating them to the public domain, but they had this embedded texture that was /not /public domain.
I think that Inkscape has since been cleaned up. You can see the Wikimedia Commons discussion at
http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/Licensing-for-textures-within-SVG-files-td1473913.html Thanks Bruce
<<attachment: bruce.vcf>>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
