rude wrote:Yes, I changed the "worst" parts of ZLIB into something more fitting (software -> graphics/artwork), but consider this:
ZLIB License wrote: In no event will the authors be held liable for any damages arising from the use of this artwork.
Damages from artwork?
Did you read any cc license, mr smartypants?
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/ms-razz.png)
They have the
same stuff (you know... down there...)
rude wrote:The main reason, however is this: I do not want people to be able to use it commercially. I plan on setting up a store (eventually), and do not want people pumping out LÖVE t-shirts.
So, qubodup, what's wrong with cc-by-nc?
Open source projects (which want to be 100% clean) and commercial projects (except you make an exception for those) are not able to use your icon.
Hm. LOVE is pretty cool, but people won't create fake t-shirts. An alternative would be using
FDL as license - it would require the license to be printed with the object on the t-shirt (unless you, the copyright holder do it).
![Glee ^^](./images/smilies/ms-glee.png)
Well ok, having a note and attaching the license would probably be enough to satisfy the fdl, but it still would differ from what zlib would make you do (nothing I think).
In any case: Provide a low-rez variant (at least up to 256px) for use with executables under a license that commercial and open source projects can use.
mike wrote:qubodup wrote:You set the logo license on the homepage to cc-by-nc... would you mind setting it back to that zlicense-svg mix thing or use the original zlib license? pleeeeeeze?
Why? Is it really that important?
Well
![Neutral :|](./images/smilies/ms-unplzd.png)
from a sane, non open source-freak point of viev: probably not...