Implied acceptance of GPL terms.

[irrevenant]

I notice that this forum has a notice indicating that posting content here implies acceptance of the GPL.

I doubt this is legal : It's far too easy for someone to turn up here and post contributions without reading the warning post. A person can't be held to a contract they may not even have seen, much less agreed to!

And this is an issue for Wesnoth as much as the individual artist. If the legal status is shaky, an artist could demand all their contributions back at some point in the future.

It's in everyone's interest that permission be explicit not just assumed. And ignoring the legal covering of butts for a moment, it's also fair to ensure that everyone knows where they stand.

AFAIK, all that's required is for people to include text like "I release this work under the GPLv2" with their post.

[Dave]

We don't just assume that everyone has read the post and accepts it. We also specifically ask people if they are happy to license their work under the GPL before we include it in the game. This goes for all contributions, except contributions that are modifications of existing parts of the game, since they must be under the GPL already.

David

[scott]

But it doesn't stop other sites from taking forum contributions without asking. Should someone's forum contribution not have been made available under some free use license, then a "reappropriation" would be wrong. We all know (probably) who I'm talking about.

[turin]

But it doesn't stop other sites from taking forum contributions without asking. Should someone's forum contribution not have been made available under some free use license, then a "reappropriation" would be wrong. We all know (probably) who I'm talking about.

Which is their legal problem, not ours.

[scott]

Yes. If an artist posts here and does not want to grant any license for others to use the image, the person would be more likely specify that.

[irrevenant]

We don't just assume that everyone has read the post and accepts it. We also specifically ask people if they are happy to license their work under the GPL before we include it in the game.

I'm glad to hear that. But if that's the case why assume GPL status for forum attachments in the first place? As Scott pointed out, this would make them free for anyone to take. Just because the Wesnoth Project is playing fair about it doesn't mean anyone else has to.

If you're asking permission for inclusion in Wesnoth anyway, why take the risk of someone accidentally giving their art away? Or of someone accidentally using art of murky legal status under the impression it's Free?

But it doesn't stop other sites from taking forum contributions without asking. Should someone's forum contribution not have been made available under some free use license, then a "reappropriation" would be wrong. We all know (probably) who I'm talking about.

Which is their legal problem, not ours.

I don't know what you're referring to, but in the case you describe it's everyone's problem: the artist who's had their work taken without implicit permission, the person who's unknowingly used the work under unclear legal status, and the forum which looks bad for producing the situation in the first place.

Yes. If an artist posts here and does not want to grant any license for others to use the image, the person would be more likely specify that.

I agree. But likeliness is insufficient grounds for assuming acceptance of a licence. It's a dodgy way to do business.

[irrevenant]

Okay, obviously noone considers this a problem except me. If everyone else is happy, so be it...

[telex4]

Well I'd agree that Jetryl's legal note regarding contributions is legally invalid and misleading.

All posts, unless otherwise specified, are "all rights reserved" copyright. As Dave said, the artists confirm that their work will be released under the GPL prior to going into the game, so that's not a problem. It's also unlikely that an artist will ever post something and then later take somebody to court for changing their work, so that's not a big problem. If anyone came along and used artwork posted here that isn't under the GPL (as explicitly specified) in their own program, that's a matter for the original artist. If they use something under the GPL then so long as their program is also under the GPL there's no problem - that's the whole point of the license, to encourage free sharing and reuse!

The only way to have all forum posts under the GPL is to have a checkbox on the post form saying "I release this work under the GPL", or perhaps a very obvious notice on the post form (not sure if that works). Jetryl's post really ought to be amended or removed to reflect this.

[Darth Fool]

Actually, I view the notice as a notice of intent. We don't want people posting on this forum content that is not freely usable. While one can certainly not presume that someone has read the notice when they first post some graphics, it is useful to have so people can point them at the notice. This is also useful for when people post artwork that they do not have the right to post. Moderator's who are suspicious can reference the notice as a quick explanation about why certain content is being removed without having to go into a long diatribe on the subject. As moderator's, we don't guarantee that we will (or even could) stop people from violating copyright on the forum, but we want the forum users to know what the house rules are. Perhaps the notice needs to be reworked, but there should definately be a notice. And preferably without too much legalese.

[scott]

You could customize the forum sign-on message. Some forums display "The Rules" when you sign up, or you could put it in the confirmatory e-mail. It leaves out current users (which are numerous), but it could be an important step to take.

[DaveJ]

These questions might be redundant, but I think it's always better to ask and make sure.

I'm putting a blog together (http://www.tucents.com, still under construction), and would like to use various unit graphics from Wesnoth as icons and ornaments. Some without modification, and some with minor modification. I plan to credit Wesnoth as the source, and to use the 'W' logo as a link to http://www.wesnoth.org.

I am assuming that this is a bit more of an 'adaptation' than would be covered under the GPL, so I would like to find out:

How can I get permission to use these images in this manner?

How can I determine the artist to give proper credit for specific images?

What else can/should I do?

[Disto]

Just link to the ones you plan to use and we can find out who the artist was...

And also you should license the pics you use/change undo GPL, quite obviously.

[DaveJ]

Thank you for your help. I have the sheet of proposed images with a description of the intended use at http://www.tucents.com/icons.html

I would like to properly credit the artists and link to whatever web page they may have.

And if I can make use of these images based on GPL, I would of course GPL the results of any adaptation.

[Jetrel]

The artists in question are:
Me,
Francisco Muñoz (fmunoz),
Peter Geinitz (wayfarer),
Cédric Duval (cedric),
and the mysterious Neoriceisgood.

Some were lightly modified by various forum folks, but that's not terribly significant since they didn't hold the copyright to the image in the first place.

All of the images in question have been released under the GPL, so, uh... that should help.

[DaveJ]

Yes it does, thank you.