(Re-) using the artwork in other GPL projects -> artist name

[ArneBab]

Hi,

I want to use some of the great artwork from Wesnoth in a free pen-and-paper roleplaying system (http://1w6.org - german, no english translation yet - license GPLv3 or later). I found the contributors of the core content, but I didn't find the artists of the campaign artwork.

Is it in SVN (and I just didn't find it)?

Specifically I currently need the names of the authors of lisar (tutorial), chantal-druid (Delfadors Memoirs) and Stalrag (Northern Rebirth).

[thespaceinvader]

Li'sar was done by Jetryl/Richard Kettering. Chantal was done by Kitty/Kathryn Polikeit (check the spelling of that one in the credits), Stalrag was Jetryl again.

Most of the campaigns have their own credits file you'll need to examine to fine art credits.

[ArneBab]

Many thanks!

I added them to our artists file.

Besides: I bow to you for licensing everything under the GPL. You showed me that having artwork under the GPL can work - and whenever someone said "that's idiotic" I could answer "wesnoth does it, too, and it flourishes!"
It helped avoid to strenuous discussions which might have weakened my determination to use free licenses for everything.

I hope many more will follow your example!

[Kalajel]

Hmm, what a coincidence! I was thinking of eventually doing the same thing for yet another Wesnoth board game I was working on (yes, I know, you must have like 3 dozens of those laying around, but since I never got a reply on that last one, I figured the project must've died so now I'm starting mine…). Though I'm in no hurry of "ripping off" pics; I'm still in develloping phase, then I'll need to playtest this sucker (will probably force my roommate to playtest it with me… ), then add more stuff to the game, then playtest said added stuff… Anyway, my main concern was that if I started for illustrations for the board game, I'd be stealing away some artist away from making art for the computer game, and since I don't want to get in direct competition with the computer game, I figures recycling/sharing illustrations would be the way to go…

[ArneBab]

I figures recycling/sharing illustrations would be the way to go…

Heck, it's GPL, which is a call for sharing

And that's one of the reasons why wesnoth is THE game I name when people ask about free gaming: The code AND the media files AND the stories are free.

[ArneBab]

Just to be completely sure: Did I understand it correctly, that all sources and data of wesnoth are licensed under the GPL?

[ivanovic]

Just to be completely sure: Did I understand it correctly, that all sources and data of wesnoth are licensed under the GPL?

Yes, everything is GPL unless those things that have a COPYING file in the respective folder stating something different for a specific file. This is/can be only the case for some of the fonts though.

Though we are not always 100% sure which kind of GPL we really use. Either it is "GPL v2 only" or "GPL v2 and later". We have definitely not changed to "GPL v3 or later".

[ArneBab]

Though we are not always 100% sure which kind of GPL we really use. Either it is "GPL v2 only" or "GPL v2 and later". We have definitely not changed to "GPL v3 or later".

Last time I checked I found "GPLv2 or later", and I hope I'm right in that, since the ruleset for which I use the images is GPLv3 or later (only v3 is general enough that it can easily be interpreted for textual works - I did that section by section in german before switching: http://1w6.org/deutsch/anhang/das-ein-w ... -der-gplv3 ).

So I can only use images which have the or later clause (in the source tree I keep them and my modifications (currently only alpha-mask editing) under GPLv2 or later - the allowed relicensing only happens when they get integrated with the text into the rulebook).

So it is crucial for me to know, if your images are GPLv2 only or GPLv2 or later.

The README states "The game's license is described in COPYING" (svn://svn.gna.org/svn/wesnoth/trunk/README)

COPYING is the GPLv2 including the clause

If the Program
specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and `any
later version', you have the option of following the terms and conditions
either of that version or of any later version published by the Free
Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation.

But that muddles it up a bit.
On the one hand the README doesn't state anything about a version. On the other hand it links to the GPLv2 in the file COPYING.

A short check on the source files (in src/) shows that not all source files use the or later clause:

Code: Select all

wesnoth/src $ grep -R "GNU General Public License" * -A1 | grep "later version"| wc -l
1082
wesnoth/src $ grep -R "GNU General Public License" * | wc -l
1131

So about 4% of the source files don't include the or later clause (42 of the 49 files are in server/jwsmtp), but I don't see exact license information in the artwork.

Is there a way to clear that up?

[ArneBab]

Update: I just checked all files for license headers.

One wrong GPLv2 only was in there (campagin_server), which is actully GPLv2 or later but has a string inside which tells people that they have to use the GPL

With a cleaner script I now get this:

Code: Select all

$ for i in `find -type f`; do if [ `grep -R "GNU General Public License" $i | wc -l` != `grep -R "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "later"| wc -l` ]; then echo $i `grep -R "GNU General Public License" $i | wc -l` `grep -R "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "later"| wc -l` ; fi ; done | sed s/.*\.svn.*//  | grep "."                                                                                                    
./server/jwsmtp/compat.cpp 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/base64.h 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/mailer.cpp 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/compat.h 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/mailer.h 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/jwsmtp.h 3 0
./server/jwsmtp/base64.cpp 3 0
./campaign_server/campaign_server.cpp 2 1

(OK, the bash script is kinda evil, but it does the job )

Excluding the campaign_server (false positive), these should be all files in src/ which are under the GPLv2 only - all others are under GPLv2 or later (possible error: nonstandard license headers).

There are far less GPLv2 only files (only 21), because I filter out historic files inside .svn folders.

[ArneBab]

One more check: The campaign server says

All add-ons uploaded to this server must be licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL). By uploading content to this server, you certify that you have the right to place the content under the conditions of the GPL, and choose to do so.

So *you* have the rights to use the uploaded content under any version of the GPL (you can still decide how you pass that on, though - you could say "what we send out is GPLv2 only" or "GPLv2 or later" or even "GPLv3 or later" - though doing the third while using server/jwsmtp could be a license violation...).

[ArneBab]

And one more fix to the bash script: It did see every file which just references the GPL without stating any version as GPlv2 only.

Corrected version (this time with some "debugging output"):

Code: Select all

for i in `find -type f`; do if [ `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "2" -A1 | grep "later" | wc -l` != `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "2"  | wc -l` ]; then echo $i `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "2" -A1 | grep "later" | wc -l` `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "2"  | wc -l` `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A1 | grep "2"` ; fi ; done | sed s/.*\.svn.*// | grep "."

Result:

only src/

Code: Select all

src/server/jwsmtp/compat.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/base64.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/mailer.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/compat.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/mailer.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/jwsmtp.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
src/server/jwsmtp/base64.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.

[ArneBab]

And a still nicer version (mainly faster):

Code: Select all

$ for i in `find -type f| sed s/.*\.svn.*//`; do if [ `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A2 | grep "version 2" -A1 | grep "later" | wc -l` != `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A2 | grep -i "version 2"  | wc -l` ]; then echo $i `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A2 | grep -i "version 2" -A1 | grep -i "later" | wc -l` `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A2 | grep -i "version 2"  | wc -l` `grep -iR "GNU General Public License" $i -A2 | grep -i "version 2" -A1 ` ; fi ; done

Result of a run over the whole wesnoth folder:

Code: Select all

./data/COPYING.txt 1 2 Version 2, June 1991 -- the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.                                                                                                      
./doc/man/de/wesnothd.6 1 2 .\" the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or .\" (at your option) any later version. -- veröffentlicht, weitergeben und/oder modifizieren, entweder gemäß Version 2 der Lizenz oder (nach Ihrer Option) jeder späteren Version. Die                                                                                               
./doc/man/de/wesnoth.6 1 2 .\" the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or .\" (at your option) any later version. -- veröffentlicht, weitergeben und/oder modifizieren, entweder gemäß Version 2 der Lizenz oder (nach Ihrer Option) jeder späteren Version. Die                                                                                                
./po/wesnoth-manpages/de.po 0 1 "veröffentlicht, weitergeben und/oder modifizieren, entweder gemäß Version 2 " "der Lizenz oder (nach Ihrer Option) jeder späteren Version. Die "                                                                         
./src/server/jwsmtp/compat.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/base64.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/mailer.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/compat.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/mailer.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/jwsmtp.h 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./src/server/jwsmtp/base64.cpp 0 1 // the Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License. //
./COPYING 1 2 Version 2, June 1991 -- the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.

And the man page says GPLv2 or later, too, so I hope everything but jwsmtp is GPLv2 or later...

(I hope that dearly, because I really like how the roleplaying ruleset with images from Wesnoth turned out - the pictures are awesome!)

Is there a way to get certainty?

PS: If you like that script, please just see it as being under GPL - like almost everything I write in my free time

[ivanovic]

Is there a way to get certainty?

Rough guess:
There is no really good way to get certainty. We had a discussion on the developer mailing list some time ago (more than a year IIRC) and came to no conclusion. Some developed under the idea of "GPL v2 only", some others under "GPL v2 and later". For artwork it is probably even less sure since there is no per file header in which stuff is stated. So there it was basically a "hey, do you license your stuff under the GPL? yeah? great!", not sure if *any* specifics regarding version were agreed upon, though I'd *guess* that the link was just to the latest GPL version.

Maybe esr knows a little more regarding what "should be assumed" in a situation like this. All I am sure about is that if you'd say "my work is GPL v2 or later" you should be perfectly fine. Yes, I know that this does not really help you...


Beside this please consider using the "edit" button to update your posts instead of posting 100 times in a row.

[ArneBab]

Maybe esr knows a little more regarding what "should be assumed" in a situation like this. All I am sure about is that if you'd say "my work is GPL v2 or later" you should be perfectly fine. Yes, I know that this does not really help you...

Will he read in here, or should I contact him directly?

EDIT: I just found a problem with that: If only one single part is GPLv2 only, I must not state "or later", since the product as a whole can't be used with a later version of the GPL.

So it is either "derived whole products must be GPLv2 only, but every component can be GPLv2 or later" or "derived whole products can be GPLv2 or later, and every component can also be used under GPLv2 or later" (which implies that they can also be used under the GPLv3).

This doesn't change being on the safe side by producing ones own contributions under GPLv2 or later, but it directly governs the license of the whole work. Everything which contains GPLv2 only code must be GPLv2 only as a whole.

Beside this please consider using the "edit" button to update your posts instead of posting 100 times in a row.

I'll do that - I didn't know what way is considered right in here, so I took a (wrong) guess at what's the least surprising way
Sorry for that.

Besides: Is server/jwsmtp included in the wesnoth client? If it is, then the german translation of the manpage should be updated accordingly, since it states that it is GPLv2 or later while server/jwsmtp must only be distributed as GPLv2 only. EDIT: I added that info to the GermanTranslationErrors wikipage: http://wiki.wesnoth.org/GermanTranslati ... Generelles

EDIT: Also you should adapt the license information on gna.org (or at least write a clarification to which parts GPLv2 or later doesn't apply): http://gna.org/projects/wesnoth/
Currently it states GPLv2 or later.

EDIT: the file "copyright" in the main folder states "GPLv2 or later" - if that applies to the artwork, everything is clear.

PS: Sorry for all that license mess - I like to get the foundations stable, and the licensing is the legal foundation of any free project, so I tend to be somewhat rigorous in checking it, if I see a possible problem...

[esr]

It has been correctly pointed out that there is no way we can be certain whether individual contributors intended GPLv1+, GPLv2 or GPLv2+. It has also been correctly pointed out, on the project IRC channel, that given our project practices a reasonable person would take assent to unqualified "GPL" to mean either "GPLv2+" or "whatever version of GPL the project is using". And that is all we need. Courts are actually more reasonable about this sort of thing than hacker superstition is - see http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1350 for discussion.

The correct thing for the project to do is publish a notice stating that (a) "GPL" is interpreted everywhere as "GPLv2++ or later" and (b) the project reserves the right to change its content to other licenses conformant to the Open Source Definition as circumstances require. That way we have a fallback if somebody breaks the GPL in court.