[Fedora-marketing-list] Re: Re: Can I use the template of the fedorawiki for my private website?

[Máirín Duffy]

Tejas Dinkar wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 10:14:19AM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>> Rex Dieter wrote:
>>> Adding extra restrictions like this goes against the OSS definition/spirit.
>> Artwork isn't software.
> 
> He said it's against the spirit :p

How can an artwork license go against the definition/spirit of open 
source software? Artwork != software. The definition/spirit of open 
source software simply does not apply. (Sidestepping the fact that 
'definition/spirit of OSS' is rather ambiguous - referring to all of OSS 
rather than a particular software license. For example, the spirit of 
the GPL is different than the spirit of a BSD license...)

The closest thing to 'oss definition/spirit' for artwork could be 
creative commons, which has a several licenses that include a 
'non-commercial' clause. Artwork licenses are necessarily different than 
software licenses - alluding to the unfortunate fact that many people 
incorrectly assume that artwork part of or related to a FOSS project (or 
if it's licensed under *any* creative commons license) is the equivalent 
of public domain. This is not the case.

It does not help, though, that the license for the moinmoin theme & 
artwork is not defined/stated anywhere (well, at least that I can find.) 
It probably should be.

> A Valid point, but IMO if you _CAN_ afford to hire someone to make a nice site for you, you should... On the Other hand if you just want a small site to play with, it's easier to just "borrow" designs :p

"Borrow" as long as it's allowed by the license for the design. Let's 
not forget that.

> Actually, who DOES own the copyrights on the templates, anyway?

This is a good question to ask. I would assume hrishi & dfong:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/2005-November/msg00142.html

Do be sure to file a request for using the Fedora logo though if you 
intend to use the logo as used in the theme.

~m