Andrea Musuruane wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:48 PM, John Arntz <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm not a Lawyer or anything, but I would pose this question: Are the >> non-free graphics allowed to be redistributed? If the license states that >> they are, but can't be altered, or used for commercial purposes then I would >> be inclined to say they are permissible as a non-free package, but if it >> says they cannot be redistributed at all, then we can't use them. If you do >> intend to clean it up by substituting free artwork, audio, etc. and that >> would make it Fedora eligible, the Fedora Artwork team may be able to help >> with making free replacements. > > > Upstream is already working in replacing the graphics but it is a slow > process and it seems there are very few people interested in helping. > As suggested above, may be submit the issue to Fedora Artwork team ? I quickly browsed Artwork and Games SIGs pages, but I didn't see anything targeted toward helping with graphics replacement though, but I might just have been too fast.
> I don't know what's the status of the original nonfree graphics. It > might be daunting to know because the original game is quite old > having been released almost two decades ago. > There is a ticket opened with upstream about this issue. http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2349520&group_id=42434&atid=433129 The last 2 comments are from me. I hope upstream can update us on the graphics licensing status. > BTW, I think that this is the same issue xrick has and xrick is in RPM > Fusion nonfree. > http://www.bigorno.net/xrick/download.html > So either we'll get pushover in RPM Fusion or we'll loose xrick ? hohum... > Bye, > > Andrea. Cheers, Xavier
