[FFmpeg-devel] Logo/Banner rules (try #1)
herve.flores at free.fr
Fri May 18 16:58:12 CEST 2012
Le 18 mai 2012 à 14:38, compn a écrit :
> On Fri, 18 May 2012 13:35:06 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi everyone
>> As there are several artists who work on logos/banners for ffmpeg.
>> I think we need some rules/framework to handle this. And given the
>> absence of a anyone else coming forth to do it. It seems i have to do
>> 3. The artist has to provide us with sufficient rights to use the art
>> in any form not limited to the webpage,tshirts and print media, to
>> refer to our project or tools at no cost to us. The rights though
>> should be restricted enough not to allow the art from being used to
>> represent other things so as to avoid confusion on what is ffmpeg
>> and what is not.
> is gpl2/lgpl2 license ok? or maybe a creative commons license.
Hi, just my 2 cents (you will not like my sentences :-D):
forget everything about gpl, ccl, etc
Open-source software is cool, but "peace'n'love behavior" is outdated (take a look to hall of shame ;-)). So, forget this stupid licenses, and act like a business company!!!
All you need is a commercial license (so a boring, proprietary license, but safe for you). You will have full control on its uses (you won't be able to reach this point with others licenses).
You spend your time onto codes? and for free? and you do a great job. So not discredit your spended time with stupidities (like code's or even logo robbery/bad use)
I'm illustrator, and I'm working with a lot of different clients (so I have some expermiment about this, about legal rights and about commercial contracts)
Your official ffmpeg logo is actually licensed under a commercial license (without any fee of course ;-)), not with gpl or ccl. It was the unique way to preserve your "visual identity"(=your control on it). PS: and no, I will not relicense it to LGPL :-D
My 2 cents: you lack 2 things:
- a decision maker (sorry, votes from not professional people has no great interest).
PS: I remember a cover for a scientific book I made, I didn't understand the principle of the book (too clever maths for my level). It was sunday, and I cannot reach my client, so I phone to the author. The result? Monday morning, I got yelled at by the client: the client is a pro, it does not have to handle "non-professional mood").
I'm not saying that you are not allowed to decide by yourself about YOUR way to present YOUR work. But you have to choose a final decision maker, and his decision will be absolute.
- a legal entity (a commercial license has to be affected to something real, like a person or a society or a foundation). FFmpegTech does not seem the best to deliver FFmpeg author rights…
So you need "something real".
with these two points, you will be functionnal about every "design directives".
PS: stupids things for fun :-) last day, when I did a proposal for summer, I did some others too (and add the halloween one today, while reading the lists ;-))
More information about the ffmpeg-devel