Re: logos and the BSD license

On 23/8/2006 18:17, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, 23. August 2006 10:38 schrieb Koen Martens:
>> You are probably right. If the goal is to let anyone use the
>> graphics in any way they want, why have a license at all??
>
> Because under international copyright law, if there is no license (or some
> other explicit permission), you don't have the right to do anything with the
> work.
>
>> The main point is, however, that it is not completely clear how the
>> BSD license, a software license, applies to graphics. So maybe there
>> is nothing wrong with having the BSD license, but that is not really
>> clear to me (and perhaps others).
>
> In computing, there is only software, hardware, and wetware. Computer
> graphics are also software.

Could graphics not be considered similar to a compiled binary image of the
software?
As long as the artist specifies that the BSD license applies.

Maybe

Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
documentation for any purpose,

from the license can be changed to

Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software, graphics and
its documentation for any purpose,

or

Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
documentation and supplied/included graphics for any purpose,