Re: [gNewSense-art] Re-Licensing Artwork.

[Sam Geeraerts]

r. siddharth wrote:
> So how are we going to proceed from here ?

I gave it some more thought and considered the FSF's statement [1] 
again. I suggest to change the notice at the bottom of the page as follows:

... Unless [[WebsiteLicenseInfo|stated otherwise]], the content in this 
website ...

The page Website LicenseInfo then says this:

<page>
The content in this Web site can be used as follows: 

 * All documentation is available under the terms of the [92]GFDL with 
no invariant sections. ([93]note on the license)
 * Artwork is Free Cultural Work and is available under the terms of 
the [94]cc-by-sa license.

When material on the same page complements each other, the end result is 
considered to be a derivative work. So when an image serves to clarify 
the text, the image is implicitly licensed under GFDL. Screenshots are 
considered to fall under fair use, so the images and components they 
show don't have to be GFDL licensed.

When an image merely illustrates a text and is not a functional part of 
the article, then the article as a whole is only considered to be 
derived from the text, not the image, and the image doesn't have to fall 
under GFDL. So on a page that lists artwork or on a homepage that has 
the person's picture, the images don't have to fall under GFDL.

== Works with a non-default license ==
 * [[link|gNewSense logo]]
</page>

I think that would settle the issue and that no further (license) 
changes would have to be made.

[1] http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/2007-05-08-fdl-scope