From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Shane Ambler <pgsql(at)007Marketing(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Mailing lists <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: logos and the BSD license |
Date: | 2006-08-23 16:29:49 |
Message-ID: | 44EC827D.4030409@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
>>>>> 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.
>> The BSD license really doesn't apply itself to software very well.
>
> Huh!? That's news to me. Can you elaborate a bit?
I think I fat fingered that ;) I meant:
The BSD License really doesn't apply itself to graphics very well.
Sorry about that.
>
>
>> I don't see what the problem with Creative Commons is. It is quickly
>> becoming the license standard for creative works.
>
> Creative Commons is not a license. If you point at a specific CC
> license we can discuss things, otherwise everyone is just handwaving.
Well, in the spirit of the BSD I would say:
Attribution (by)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-08-23 17:13:02 | Re: logos and the BSD license |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-08-23 16:16:05 | Re: logos and the BSD license |